Now that the 2024 California legislative session is over, what did we learn this year about workers’ comp at the Capitol? What follows are some takeaways and references to some of the bills that were passed and others that died.

Julius Young

Applicants' attorneys and labor advocates received legislative support for some of their proposals. But the employer/insurer coalition continues to be powerful, so most applicant-side workers’ comp efforts were rebuffed in 2024.

Bills passed by the Legislature but vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom included the following:

• SB 1299, a bill to create a rebuttable industrial injury presumption for agricultural workers who develop or manifest a heat illness injury working outdoors where the agricultural employer failed to comply with existing heat standards.
• SB 1058, a bill to allow certain park rangers to draw Labor Code Section 4850 salary continuation benefits.
• SB 636, a bill that would have required that beginning July 1, 2026, for private employers, only a physician licensed under California law could modify or deny requests for authorization of workers’ compensation treatment.

Other workers’ comp-related bills that died before reaching Newsom’s desk included:

• SB 1346, where a UR denial overturned by IMR would have excluded that period from the 104-week TD cap.
• AB 3106, which would have required school employers to pay COVID-19-positive employees to stay home per certain RTW guidelines.
• SB 1205, originally a bill to require employers to provide TD to workers who missed time from work to attend medical appointments, later amended to provide that an employer’s denial of a request to attend scheduled treatment during work hours be deemed a Labor Code Section 132A violation.

The California Applicants' Attorneys Association did have one victory, albeit a small one. The governor signed AB 1870, which adds to language that must be posted at jobsites. Effective Jan. 1, 2025, the poster must include language in English and Spanish informing employees of their rights to consult a workers’ compensation attorney. This bill sends an important message and thus was worthwhile, though there is little evidence that many workers actually consult the posters to learn of their rights.

Other bills that passed and were signed into law are those that addressed particular needs in the comp system. Those include the following:

• AB 2337 authorizes the use of electronic signatures on workers’ compensation documents.
• AB 171, a trailer bill that modifies the time frame for a petition for reconsideration to be denied if not acted on from 60 days from the filing date, changing that to 60 days from the date a trial judge transmits the case to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board.
• SB 1455 delays until Jan. 1, 2028, a requirement that all contractors have workers’ comp insurance unless they can prove they had no employees, and delays requirement for the Contractors State Licensing Board to implement a verification process.
• AB 1239 extends a sunset date on a pilot program to allow clams administrators to use debit cards to pay indemnity benefits.

Labor did have more success with bills that address industry-specific situations. Those include the following:

• AB 2754 amends Section 2810 and Section 2810.4 to expand joint liability provisions for misclassifying employees as independent contractors to port drayage carriers and their client employers that use contracted labor.
• AB 977 makes assault and battery against a hospital ER health care provider a crime.
• AB 1843 requires ambulance employers to provide peer representative emotional support on request.
• AB 1976 requires that Cal/OSHA draft requirements that workplace first aid kits include naloxone opioid antagonists.
• AB 2975 requires Cal/OSHA to develop workplace violence prevention standards to include a weapons screening policy.
• AB 2499 prohibits discharge, discrimination or retaliation against victims of violence or family members of victims and addresses paid sick days entitlements.
• SB 1105 allows outdoor agricultural workers to use paid sick leave to avoid smoke, heat or flooding declared as a local or state emergency and prohibits discrimination for claiming such leave.

Julius Young is an applicants' attorney and a partner for the Boxer & Gerson law firm in Oakland. This column was reprinted with his permission from his Workers Comp Zone blog on the firm's website.