California lawmakers to propose legislation giving ride-hailing drivers right to unionize

April 9, 2025 By Suhauna Hussain Leave a Comment

California lawmakers are pursuing legislation that could give drivers for apps like Uber and Lyft the ability to form unions, while still being classified as independent contractors.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) and Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) plan to introduce Assembly Bill 1340, also titled the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act, on Tuesday.

The legislation would allow drivers to negotiate pay as well as other terms of their agreements with app-based companies, exempting them from state and federal antitrust laws that would prohibit such activity, according to a draft reviewed by The Times.

“Fundamentally what this bill seeks to do is empower rideshare drivers to advocate for better working conditions,” Wicks said in an interview.

The proposal does not include food delivery drivers.

The exact process of how collective bargaining would be overseen by the state is not outlined in the proposal.

Wicks and Berman said that they expect those details to be hashed out during the legislative process, with conversations from all stakeholders, including drivers, ride-hailing companies and Service Employees International Union California, which is backing the bill.

Typically, antitrust laws would prevent collective action by independent contractors. For example, Seattle faced litigation when it attempted to establish a driver bargaining model through a local ordinance in 2015.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an Uber subsidiary successfully challenged the law, arguing that bargaining by independent-contractor drivers amounted to illegal concerted action and price fixing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit disagreed with the city’s position that it had created a state-supervised regulatory program, finding that it was not exempt from antitrust law.

Drivers for Uber and Lyft are considered independent contractors under a voter-approved state law — Proposition 22 — that went into effect in late 2020. The law originally had barred collective bargaining over drivers’ compensation, benefits and working conditions, but an appeals court struck down the provision, arguing it inappropriately limited the California Legislature’s authority.

The state Supreme Court in a ruling last year largely upheld Proposition 22 but did not address the collective bargaining provision.

SEIU California contends that the Legislature has the authority to allow drivers to collectively bargain, based on the appeals court ruling. However, if the bill is ultimately approved by lawmakers, it’s possible ride-hailing companies might challenge it.

“A union is the only pathway for 600,000 rideshare drivers to improve their pay and working conditions under Prop 22,” said Tia Orr, executive director of SEIU California, in an emailed statement.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

Amazon workers are striking at multiple delivery hubs. Here’s what you should know

December 21, 2024 By Staff Leave a Comment

Amazon workers affiliated with the Teamsters union continued a strike Friday at seven of the company’s delivery hubs just days before Christmas.

The workers, who voted to authorize strikes in recent days, joined picket lines on Thursday after Amazon ignored a Sunday deadline the union had set for contract negotiations. Workers at Starbucks stores are also were going on a five-day strike starting Friday to protest lack of progress in contract negotiations with the coffee company.

Amazon, for its part, said it doesn’t expect the strike at delivery stations to impact holiday shipments.

The e-commerce giant has a couple hundred employees at each delivery station. The Teamsters mainly have focused on organizing delivery drivers, who work for contractors that handle package deliveries for the company. But Amazon has rebuffed demands to come to the negotiating table since it doesn’t consider the drivers to be its employees.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters also says the union represents some Amazon warehouse workers.

Here’s what else you need to know:

Where are the strikes happening?

The strikes are taking place at three delivery hubs in Southern California, and one each in San Francisco, New York City, Atlanta, Georgia, and Skokie, Illinois, according to the union’s announcement.

The union hasn’t said how many workers are participating in the strike, nor how long it will go on. Vinnie Perrone, the president of a local Teamsters union in metro New York, said Thursday that the walkout would continue “as long as it takes.”

The union, which claims to represent 10,000 Amazon workers at 10 facilities, said workers in more locations were prepared to join the fight.

Employees at a company air hub in California have authorized a strike. So have workers at an Amazon warehouse in New York, which unionized with the nascent Amazon Labor Union in 2022 and has since affiliated with the Teamsters.

The Teamsters says its local unions are also putting up picket lines at other Amazon warehouses.

A company spokesperson said Thursday the strikers were “almost entirely outsiders, not Amazon employees or partners, and the suggestion otherwise is just another lie from the Teamsters.”

Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien was scheduled to rally with striking union members on Friday at one of the facilities in California.

What do the workers want?

The striking workers are fighting for higher wages, better benefits, and safer work conditions.

The Teamsters have tried to get Amazon to come to the negotiating table since last year, when the labor organization first said it had unionized a group of delivery drivers in California who work for a contractor. Amazon — which denies it employs the workers — refused, leading the union to file unfair labor charges against the company at the National Labor Relations Board.

In August, prosecutors at the federal labor agency classified Amazon as a “joint employer” of subcontracted drivers. In September, the company boosted hourly pay for the drivers amid the growing pressure.

Amazon warehouse workers who voted to union in the New York City borough of Staten Island also have tried to get the company to engage in contract negotiations.

The National Labor Relations Board certified the Amazon Labor Union election, but the company objected to the representation vote and refused to bargain. In the process, Amazon also filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the labor board, which it accused of tainting the vote.

Some organizers involved with the unionization effort there have long believed Amazon would not come to the negotiating table unless workers went on strike.

What about holiday deliveries?

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , , ,

A new California law bans your boss from ordering you to attend anti-union meetings

December 18, 2024 By Jeanne Kuang Leave a Comment

Starting Jan. 1, California employers won’t be able to require workers to attend any meetings related to their political or religious views — or how their bosses feel about unions. 

That’s according to a new law, Senate Bill 399, that is one of the most prominent of the usual wave of new workplace laws businesses are expected to follow each year. 

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

The legislation came as the Legislature’s Democratic supermajority sought to support a rising wave of unionization across California and the nation. 

The law bans mandatory workplace meetings in which the employer discusses their “opinion about religious or political matters,” the latter of which is defined to include the decision on whether to join a union. Workers cannot be disciplined for refusing to attend such a meeting under SB 399. 

The new law’s proponents, including the California Labor Federation, say such meetings can intimidate workers out of exercising their right to unionize, though retaliation from employers is already illegal. 

Business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce opposed the new law, arguing it would infringe on employers’ right to free speech and ability to discuss the effects of laws or regulation on their industries. The law includes exceptions for employees, such as those working for political parties, whose job includes talking about politics.

California is joining nine other mostly Democratic states that have recently banned these so-called captive audience meetings. The law’s passage was a victory for the labor movement as it braces for the Trump administration next month.

Starting Jan. 1, California employers won’t be able to require workers to attend any meetings related to their political or religious views — or how their bosses feel about unions. 

That’s according to a new law, Senate Bill 399, that is one of the most prominent of the usual wave of new workplace laws businesses are expected to follow each year. 

The legislation came as the Legislature’s Democratic supermajority sought to support a rising wave of unionization across California and the nation. 

The law bans mandatory workplace meetings in which the employer discusses their “opinion about religious or political matters,” the latter of which is defined to include the decision on whether to join a union. Workers cannot be disciplined for refusing to attend such a meeting under SB 399. 

The new law’s proponents, including the California Labor Federation, say such meetings can intimidate workers out of exercising their right to unionize, though retaliation from employers is already illegal. 

Business groups such as the California Chamber of Commerce opposed the new law, arguing it would infringe on employers’ right to free speech and ability to discuss the effects of laws or regulation on their industries. The law includes exceptions for employees, such as those working for political parties, whose job includes talking about politics.

California is joining nine other mostly Democratic states that have recently banned these so-called captive audience meetings. The law’s passage was a victory for the labor movement as it braces for the Trump administration next month.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , , ,

John Seiler: Political fliers reflect union power in California politics

October 25, 2024 By Staff Leave a Comment

Want to know who wields the most political clout in California? Look at the campaign fliers dropping in your mailbox, especially the fine print. Many fliers are funded by the candidate’s own committee or political party. But many others are funded by outside groups, generally pro-business for Republicans and pro-union for Democrats. 

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

I’m registered Republican, but have gathered fliers from neighbors who are Democrats or independents in Irvine. We’re in the 47th Congressional District, with 35% Democratic registration, 35% Republican and 24% no party preference. It’s one of the top battleground districts for control of the House of Representatives, pitting Democratic state Sen. Dave Min against Scott Baugh, the Republican Assembly leader in the late 1990s and formerly head of the Orange County Republican Party.

A flier was sent out by the United Domestic Workers of America Action Fund to its members, many of whose pay comes from taxpayers. “Register to Vote Today,” it reads. It doesn’t recommend candidates, but promises, “More power for UDW members at the bargaining table…. Support those who support us.”

The UDW’s website boasts of its “more than 171,000 home care and family child care providers across the state of California.” According to Influence Watch, the UDW is “a left-of-center California labor union of home care workers affiliated with the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.” 

Not surprisingly, Baugh was attacked in a flier by the AFSCME Working Families Fund, which is based in Washington, D.C., not California. “Scott Baugh Is in Corporate America’s Corner, Not Ours,” it warns. “People First, NOT Corporate Cronies…. AGAINST laws that would punish corporations that withheld pay from workers.” For the latter, a footnote is provided in minuscule print: “Assembly Floor Vote, AB 633, 9/10/99.” 

A bill from 25 years ago? Fortunately, the state’s online database of legislation starts in 1999. AB 633 tightened regulation on garment sweatshops. The opposition said it would kill jobs and current worker protections were adequate. It passed along party lines and Gov. Gray Davis signed it into law. It’s impossible to assess the bill’s actual effects because several more laws affecting garment workers have been passed in the ensuing 25 years, such as Senate Bill 62 from 2022, which bans being paid by piece.

In Irvine, we have a tough race for mayor among seven candidates. The two with the most flyers are Larry Agran, currently vice mayor and a fixture in city politics for more than three decades, and Councilmember Tammy Kim. I didn’t get any union flyers favoring Agran. But his own campaign hung a flier from my doorknob that included a little bag of six seeds and a promise “to plant another 200,000 seeds the next five years” to “help clean the air and cool our city.” Clever.

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , , ,

California lawmakers want to ban anti-union meetings at work, but will Newsom go along?

September 6, 2024 By Staff Leave a Comment

On the final day of their session, California lawmakers sent Gov. Gavin Newsom a bill banning employers from forcing workers to sit through anti-union meetings — the latest attempt by Democratic politicians to support union activity amid a revived labor movement. 

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

If Newsom signs Senate Bill 399, California would join nine other states that have recently passed laws prohibiting an employer from requiring workers to attend so-called captive audience meetings about their political or religious views. 

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, signed one such law last year, and has touted it on the campaign trail. 

The California bill can cover discussions of employers’ views on political candidates or legislation, but it’s largely aimed at one specific kind of required workplace meeting — when bosses discuss whether workers should unionize. 

California workers, following a nationwide trend, have increasingly sought unionization in recent years. Union elections have spiked in the last three years, with nearly 17,000 workers voting at more than 300 California workplaces in 2023. So far in 2024, more than 14,000 California workers have voted in a union election, according to a CalMatters analysis of National Labor Relations Board data.

The National Labor Relations Board has generally allowed “captive audience” meetings for decades — provided employers don’t threaten workers or withhold benefits for supporting a union. But the board’s general counsel under President Joe Biden has sought to crack down on them, arguing they are often used to intimidate employees.

Business groups say the bill would be much broader, and would infringe on employers’ free speech rights. State bans in Connecticut and Minnesota have been challenged in court. Wisconsin in 2009 was one of the first states to ban such meetings; when employers filed suit the following year, arguing it conflicted with federal law, the state backed down and agreed not to enforce it. 

The California Chamber of Commerce made SB 399 one of their most fiercely contested bills this year. In a legislative alert on Tuesday, the chamber said the bill would “effectively chill any discussions related to legislation, regulations, or other ‘political matters.’” 

In an August letter to lawmakers opposing the bill, business groups argued they already can’t coerce workers to vote for certain candidates or to vote against unionizing, and said because the bill could fine bosses for talking to employees about political views but not other matters, it’s a violation of the First Amendment. 

The bill includes exemptions for “political organizations” that employ people whose job duties require them to engage in political activity, but chamber policy advocate Ashley Hoffman said in the letter that it’s too vague. 

But supporters say the bill only targets intimidation in the workplace by penalizing employers who punish workers for refusing to attend a “captive audience” meeting. 

“If an employer wants to share [their] beliefs at the worksite, that’s fine, but no one should be coerced to listen,” Assemblymember Eloise Gómez Reyes, a San Bernardino Democrat, said on the Assembly floor Friday before voting for the bill.  

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

California bill prohibits grocery stores from having self-checkout if worker standards aren’t met

August 22, 2024 By Ashley Zavala 1 Comment

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — If you’re buying anything from a carton of eggs to a bottle of laundry detergent, the experience at your grocery store’s self-checkout station could look and feel different under a proposed California law.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

SB 1446 would prohibit grocery and convenience stores in the state from having self-checkout stands if they don’t meet certain labor requirements outlined in the proposal. Those requirements include having one worker monitor no more than two self-checkout stations, plus public notice of any new technology the stores might implement that could impact the workplace.

The bill also limits the number of items customers can buy at self-checkout stations and would also prevent customers from buying items that are under extra layers of security such as skincare locked behind a case, or electronics wrapped in an anti-theft tag.

The lawmaker who wrote the proposal, Democratic State Senator Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, said the measure is meant to combat retail theft and keep workers safe.

“We’ve focused a lot on retail theft and certainly given all the crime bills that have passed, communities like mine — South Central LA — have a lot at stake here,” said Smallwood-Cuevas. “If our communities are going to have to take accountability for retail theft, we think the retailers and the grocers should be doing the same.”

But grocers vehemently argue the measure is not at all about retail theft.

“You can call a tree a duck, but that does not make it a duck,” said Daniel Conway, the Vice President of Government Affairs for the California Grocers Association. Conway noted the bill was not part of the bipartisan retail theft package backed by Gov. Newsom and legislative leaders, and the bill is not supported by law enforcement.

Click here to read the full article at KCRA.com

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

Walters: Unions try to protect jobs in California with legislation to limit use of digital technology

August 16, 2024 By Staff Leave a Comment

When the industrial revolution erupted in 18th century Britain — replacing handwork with machinery in the manufacture of goods — many of the affected textile workers responded by attacking and disabling the machines.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

The rebels became known as Luddites, so named for “General Ned Ludd” or “King Ludd,” a mythical figure living in Sherwood Forest. In the more than 200 years since, the moniker has been applied to anyone who resists introduction of new technology, particularly in the workplace.

Over the last half-century digital technology has driven a new industrial revolution, completely changing the nature of work as it destroyed old economic sectors and created new ones.

When I began my career in journalism 64 years ago, I and other reporters wrote our stories on paper, using cast iron Underwood typewriters, after which the “copy” was read and sometimes altered by an editor with a lead pencil. It was then set in metallic type by a composing room worker and transformed into a metallic printing plate by other workers who installed it on an immense printing press to produce newspapers.

Today I’m writing this column on a Hewlett Packard computer. Virtually all the information being cited in the column was gathered from online sources, including details of a bill from the Legislature’s website and videos from CalMatters’ Digital Democracy archives.

When I’m finished, the column moves electronically to an editor using the same digital technology and the finished product then is electronically published on the Internet. CalMatters exists because of technology, while newspapers still producing paper copies are struggling due to competition for advertising from digital rivals.

California has played the seminal role in the new technological revolution, but it’s also a center of resistance.

The bill to which I referred earlier is Senate Bill 1446, which sailed through the Senate earlier this year but is now enmeshed in a clash between labor unions and retailers, particularly grocers, in the Assembly.

When the industrial revolution erupted in 18th century Britain — replacing handwork with machinery in the manufacture of goods — many of the affected textile workers responded by attacking and disabling the machines.

The rebels became known as Luddites, so named for “General Ned Ludd” or “King Ludd,” a mythical figure living in Sherwood Forest. In the more than 200 years since, the moniker has been applied to anyone who resists introduction of new technology, particularly in the workplace.

Over the last half-century digital technology has driven a new industrial revolution, completely changing the nature of work as it destroyed old economic sectors and created new ones.

When I began my career in journalism 64 years ago, I and other reporters wrote our stories on paper, using cast iron Underwood typewriters, after which the “copy” was read and sometimes altered by an editor with a lead pencil. It was then set in metallic type by a composing room worker and transformed into a metallic printing plate by other workers who installed it on an immense printing press to produce newspapers.

Today I’m writing this column on a Hewlett Packard computer. Virtually all the information being cited in the column was gathered from online sources, including details of a bill from the Legislature’s website and videos from CalMatters’ Digital Democracy archives.

When I’m finished, the column moves electronically to an editor using the same digital technology and the finished product then is electronically published on the Internet. CalMatters exists because of technology, while newspapers still producing paper copies are struggling due to competition for advertising from digital rivals.

California has played the seminal role in the new technological revolution, but it’s also a center of resistance.

The bill to which I referred earlier is Senate Bill 1446, which sailed through the Senate earlier this year but is now enmeshed in a clash between labor unions and retailers, particularly grocers, in the Assembly.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

California promised a higher minimum wage for health care workers. Will Newsom delay it?

May 19, 2024 By Ana B. Ibarra Leave a Comment

Gov. Gavin Newsom is cutting it close. He signed a law last fall that phases in a $25 minimum wage for California’s lowest-paid health care workers beginning June 1. Then, he said he wanted to delay it because of its potential to exacerbate the severe state budget shortfall. 

Photo by Marcio Jose Sanchez, AP Photo

But two weeks before the deadline for employers to start paying more to their employees, many health workers are still waiting to hear whether they will in fact see a raise.

Some health workers remain hopeful. Others have already been notified by their employers of their upcoming raise or have already started to see increased pay.

When Newsom presented his latest budget proposal last week, the governor said negotiations around potential changes to the health worker minimum wage law, Senate Bill 525, are still taking place. He promised a deal between his administration, the Legislature and proponents of the law would be hashed out in the upcoming weeks. 

“This budget will not be signed without that deal that we committed to being addressed,” Newsom said. He usually signs a budget for the next fiscal year in late June.  

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

Meanwhile the union that advocated for the health care pay increase has launched an advertising campaign that aims to hold Newsom to the law he signed. 

One ad by Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West on the social media site X shows a dialysis worker named Alice and it reads, “The dialysis care Alice provides is lifesaving. Yet, with caregivers at her facility starting out at only $18/hr, it’s no wonder there’s a short staffing crisis.

A $25/hr minimum wage for healthcare workers will help ensure patients get the care they need.”

Nathan Selzer, communications director for SEIU-UHW, said his union posted the messages because, “Our workers were concerned and remain concerned. What we saw in conversations earlier this year was folks really focusing only on money and only on dollars and cents, and not on what those dollars and cents are used for.”

SEIU-UHW is an affiliate of SEIU California, which sponsored the law.

“We made a decision that we’ve got to make sure we’re reminding people why this was made into law to begin with,” he said.

Selzer said he is not directly involved in conversations with the governor’s office and legislators, but that confusion among many workers rings true. “We’ve heard June 1, we’ve heard July 1. It remains to be seen what actually happens here,” he said.

Deadline to postpone minimum wage hike

What exactly is holding up the negotiations is unclear. Lawmakers and Newsom would have to pass and sign legislation that would push back the start date within two weeks to delay it effectively. 

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

Workers at an LA Starbucks file petition to unionize

November 22, 2023 By Kevin Smith Leave a Comment

They allege low wages, erratic scheduling, unsanitary conditions and workloads that leave employees exhausted

Low wages, erratic scheduling, unsanitary conditions and heavy workloads are the chief complaints driving workers at a Starbucks in Los Angeles to unionize.

Employees filed a petition Friday with the National Labor Relations Board to join Starbucks Workers United.

“We expect to hear back from the labor board in six weeks,” said Andrew Gillespie, a shift supervisor at the store, at 5757 Wilshire Blvd. near the La Brea Tar Pits. “Then we’ll hold our election and hopefully win our union.”

The employees are joining a nationwide movement that has seen more than 9,000 baristas organizing for better working conditions, fair wages and consistent schedules.

Starbucks Workers United has gained considerable traction in recent years, unionizing more than 360 Starbucks stores in 41 states and Washington, D.C. since December 2021.

Locally, that includes three LA locations and two in Anaheim, with additional stores in Long Beach, Lakewood, Huntington Beach, La Quinta, Barstow, Encinitas and San Diego.

Gillespie, 26, who has worked at the Wilshire Boulevard store for a year and a half, said management has been “unsupportive” in its scheduling.

“They’re focused on trying to cut labor costs wherever possible,” he said. “Business is always heavy in the morning, but it’s busy in the afternoon, too and employees will end up doing the work of two, three or even four people.”

Gillespie said the store has also had an ongoing problem with ants, cockroaches and mosquitoes.

“They come from the Miracle Mile drainage system,” he said. “I’ve tried to get them to bring in an exterminator, but they just give us DIY tips on how to address it ourselves.”

In a statement issued Monday, Nov. 20, Starbucks said it’s encouraged by the progress it’s seen toward first contracts at stores where union representatives have approached bargaining with “professionalism and an actual interest in discussing partner priorities with our bargaining committees.”

“Wherever we can quickly and broadly improve partner benefits and perks, our history demonstrates we have,” the company said.

Starbucks Workers United said the coffee chain has launched a “ruthless union-busting campaign.”

“We demand change in our workplace and do not deserve retaliation for trying to speak up,” said Hailie Muro, a barista at the LA location.

Administrative judges have issued 37 decisions finding Starbucks committed more than 300 federal labor law violations, the union said, including unlawful firings, refusing to bargain and giving nonunion workers higher wages and better benefits than employees who have sought to unionize.

A decision last month by Judge Mara-Louise Anzalone marked the first nationwide ruling against the coffee giant amid its resistance to a unionization wave that began two years ago.

Anzalone noted that Starbucks has rolled out new wage rates and expanded benefits to employees, but only to its “entire hourly, nonunion workforce.” She ordered the company to compensate thousands of unionized workers for the wages and benefits they were unlawfully denied.

Starbucks said it recently announced annual pay raises of 3-5% for “all eligible U.S. hourly retail partners, differentiated for tenure — further enhancing our current average U.S. hourly partner pay of $17.50 per hour.”

Gillespie said workers at the LA store are seeking a base wage of $20 an hour.

Click here to read the full article at OC Register

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , ,

CHP officers get biggest raise in 20 years as hiring challenges drive up California police pay

November 17, 2023 By Nigel Duara Leave a Comment

California’s state police for the second year in a row will enjoy a salary bump that far exceeds the raises Gov. Gavin Newsom has offered to other public employees thanks to a state law that grants them automatic pay increases.

California Highway Patrol officers are getting a 7.9% wage increase, marking their biggest raise in 20 years. Last year, they received a 6.2% general salary increase. Both are historically high raises for the officers.

Raises for CHP officers by state law are based on the average compensation at five other law enforcement agencies: The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office and the police departments in Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland and San Francisco. 

The formula includes base salary, retirement benefits and add-ons like longevity pay and educational incentive pay. It does not include overtime.

An annual compensation survey released late Monday by the state department of Human Resources found the average take-home pay for those agencies is $118,164 while the average net pay for CHP officers is $109,476.

The new salary increase for CHP officers is expected to bring their base wages up to what the other agencies are paying.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the 7.9% increase is the biggest pay bump for the California Highway Patrol since at least 2003, when they were given a 7.7% increase. 

Police salaries are increasingly competitive and a source of friction among agencies seeking to fill growing vacancies with a shrinking pool of eligible applicants — sheriffs and police chiefs have said that a significant percentage of applicants fail background tests.

The state, meanwhile, isn’t making it any easier to hire police officers — particularly those who leave larger departments with shoddy disciplinary or criminal records and find employment at smaller organizations. New laws have raised the minimum hiring age of law enforcement officers to 21.

That has led to bidding wars among law enforcement agencies, who use anything from signing bonuses to gym memberships to lure in recruits

The Los Angeles City Council and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in the past year each approved lucrative new law enforcement contracts in the interest of retaining officers.

CHP’s new recruiting plan

The CHP has had its own challenges hiring. Last year, the agency embarked on a hiring campaign called the CHP 1000 in which it committed to hiring hundreds of new officers. Its early ads highlighted pay, namely that entry-level officers could expect to earn $100,000 in their first year on the job.

Newsom in October vetoed a bill that aimed to help the CHP find more recruits. It would have raised the agency’s top enlistment age from 35 to 40. 

The CHP union advocated for the bill, telling lawmakers that “raising the maximum age from 35 to 40 will widen the pool of applicants, increase the number of cadets, and ultimately the number of officers committed to serve and protect the public.”

Newsom in his veto message wrote that CHP’s recent recruitment efforts had paid off, with the agency “on track to double” the number of cadets at its academy. 

The California Association of Highway Patrolmen, which represents about 7,000 officers, is the only state worker union that does not have to bargain over wage increases because of the law that sets officer compensation based on what other agencies pay. 

A bill this year would have given a similar perk to firefighters at the California Department of Forestry and Protection — or Cal Fire. It died in September without reaching Newsom. 

The bill would have compelled the state Human Resources Department to calculate wage increases for the 8,000 or so state firefighters every year based on what other 20 local fire departments pay.

The union representing Cal Fire firefighters has said that the state is losing firefighters to other departments because the state has not kept up with competing organizations’ salaries.

Salary increases for California state workers

The biggest general salary increase Newsom has offered to a public employee union during contract negotiations is 4%. That salary hike for the 100,000 employees represented by SEIU Local 1000, is scheduled for July 1, 2025, and the contract allows the governor to knock it down to 3% if the Finance Department finds the state can’t afford the full raise.

Although Newsom has held the line under 4% for general salary increases, his administration has offered a mix of bonuses and special pay raises for workers in hard-to-fill positions to retain employees in a period of high inflation. 

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , ,