California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1003

Introduced
2/18/21  
Refer
3/4/21  
Report Pass
4/21/21  
Refer
4/26/21  
Report Pass
5/4/21  
Refer
5/5/21  
Refer
5/12/21  
Report Pass
5/20/21  
Engrossed
5/27/21  
Engrossed
5/27/21  
Refer
5/28/21  
Refer
6/9/21  
Refer
6/9/21  
Report Pass
6/30/21  
Report Pass
6/30/21  
Refer
6/30/21  
Refer
6/30/21  
Report Pass
7/13/21  
Report Pass
7/13/21  
Refer
7/13/21  
Refer
7/13/21  
Refer
8/16/21  
Report Pass
8/26/21  
Report Pass
8/26/21  
Enrolled
9/9/21  
Enrolled
9/9/21  
Chaptered
9/27/21  
Chaptered
9/27/21  
Passed
9/27/21  

Caption

Wage theft: grand theft.

Impact

By redefining wage theft as grand theft, AB1003 increases the potential penalties for employers who unlawfully withhold wages. This alteration in the legal framework aims to enhance compliance with wage laws by establishing a stronger deterrent against wage theft. The bill also clarifies that independent contractors are to be considered employees for the purposes of this legislation, thereby extending protections to a broader group of workers. Consequently, employers may face harsher repercussions for wage violations, including the potential of felony charges.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 1003, introduced by Lorena Gonzalez, addresses the issue of wage theft by categorizing it as grand theft under California's Penal Code. The bill amends existing laws regulating payments of wages and benefits by making intentional theft of wages greater than $950 from a single employee or $2,350 from multiple employees within a 12-month period punishable as grand theft. This change reinforces protections for employees against violations in wage payments, which previously fell under misdemeanor charges and civil penalties.

Sentiment

The overall sentiment towards AB1003 reflects a strong support for worker rights among advocacy groups and labor organizations, who view this legislation as a significant step in combating wage theft in California. Supporters argue that it sends a clear message to employers about the serious consequences of exploiting workers. Critics, however, may express concerns about potential unintended consequences for small businesses and the complexities it might introduce into employment practices. Nevertheless, the positive sentiment largely prevails in discussions surrounding this bill.

Contention

Notably, there may be points of contention regarding the bill's implementation and enforcement. Some business owners worry that the raised threshold for felony charges could lead to an uptick in litigation or compliance challenges for smaller establishments that may struggle to adhere to the enhanced regulations. Additionally, the bill allows for restitution claims by employees, which may increase operational costs for businesses that fail to comply with wage laws. Despite these concerns, the proponents argue that the benefits of protecting workers far outweigh the challenges presented to employers.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB1402

Labor contracting: customer liability.

LA HB368

Provides relative to earned wage access services (OR NO IMPACT See Note)

TX HB2043

Relating to the regulation of earned wage access services; requiring an occupational registration; imposing fees.

TX SB938

Relating to the regulation of earned wage access services; providing an administrative penalty.

CA SB1423

Worker classification.

MS SB2496

Mississippi Earned Wage Access Services Act; enact.

MS HB1307

Mississippi Earned Wage Access Services Act; create.

AR HB1517

To Establish The Earned Wage Access Services Act.