Quantcast

California employers concerned with privacy, security impact of new COVID-19 legislation

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

California employers concerned with privacy, security impact of new COVID-19 legislation

Legislation
Newsomfromgovwebsite1280x640

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who signed SB 1159 and AB 685 on Sept. 17 | gov.ca.gov | gov.ca.gov

New workplace legislation just signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom has raised concerns among the business community due to imprecise language regarding COVID-19 notification requirements and outbreak presumptions.

SB 1159, which Newsom signed Sept. 17 as urgency legislation – effective immediately – creates a rebuttable presumption that workers became infected on the job if certain criteria are met, and includes outbreak protocol measures for any business with five or more workers.

“Unfortunately, the bill in its final form is administratively burdensome, unrelated to actual risk in the workplace, and unworkable for employers,” according to opposition from the California Coalition on Workers’ Compensation and other employers included in the Aug. 31 Senate floor analyses.

While SB 1159 addresses key concerns, the complexity of implementation will leave businesses vulnerable to litigation, with the language on “specific place of employment” causing particular apprehension, John Kabateck, California state director with the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) told the Northern California Record.

“There is major confusion as to whether that means a single location, how it applies to businesses with other stores, or to projects working out in the field,” Kabateck said. “This is very unclear and murky; it opens the door to more attorneys to shake down small businesses.”

Of equal if not more concern is AB 685, also signed Sept. 17, which mandates employers notify of potential COVID-19 exposure within one day; when it’s more than three cases, data is then posted on the state Department of Health website.

Businesses had fought particularly hard to eliminate that “shaming” factor, Kabateck said. “If it can legitimately be proven that an employee has been exposed to Covid in the workplace, there should be a reasonable and responsible system in place for notification.”

But putting the data on the internet, with the expectation the information is still correct, unfairly subjects businesses to the so-called shame game, Kabateck said.

“It could be inaccurate or outdated by the time it’s posted,” Kabateck said. “It’s automatically guilty until proven innocent with this law, playing the shame game by sending a message to the community that your business is off limits. They will be avoided by customers, deemed to be taboo and radioactive health-wise.”

AB 685 goes into effect Jan. 1.

“Not unlike ADA and Prop 65 laws, this will create a massive cottage industry for many plaintiff’s attorneys who will use this this twisted law for their own personal gain and benefit,” Kabateck said.

More News