AB 283 — In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act.

Summary

(1) Existing law establishes the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program, which is administered by the State Department of Social Services, counties, and other entities, under which qualified aged, blind, or disabled persons are provided with supportive services in order to permit them to remain in their own homes. Existing law authorizes a county board of supervisors to elect to contract with a nonprofit consortium to provide for the delivery of in-home supportive services or to establish, by ordinance, a public authority to provide for the delivery of those services, in accordance with certain procedures. Existing law deems a public authority created under these provisions to be the employer of in-home supportive services personnel under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, which governs labor relations between local public employers and employees. Existing law also deems a nonprofit consortium contracting with a county to be the employer of in-home supportive services personnel for purposes of collective bargaining over wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. Existing law grants recipients of in-home supportive services the right to hire, fire, and supervise the work of any in-home supportive services personnel providing services for them. Existing law prohibits the state and specified local public employers from deterring or discouraging public employees from becoming or remaining members of an employee organization. Existing law also requires specified public employers to provide exclusive employee representatives access to new employee orientations. Existing law generally grants the Public Employment Relations Board jurisdiction over violations of these provisions. Existing law defines "public employers" who are subject to these provisions as including, among others, public agencies, cities, counties, and districts. This bill would expand the definition of "public employer," for purposes of those provisions, to include an employer who is subject to the In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act, which the bill would create. The bill would establish a method for resolving disputes regarding wages, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment between the state and recognized employee organizations representing individual providers. The bill would provide for the right of employees, also known as individual providers under the act, to form, join, and participate in activities of employee organizations for the purposes of representation on all matters within the scope of employee organizations. The bill would define "employee" or "individual provider" for these purposes to mean a person authorized to provide in-home supportive services pursuant to the individual provider mode or waiver personal care services, as prescribed. This bill would, for purposes of collective bargaining, deem the state to be the employer of record of individual providers in each county. The bill would grant the in-home supportive services recipient with the right to hire, fire, and supervise the work of the individual providers providing services to them. Among other things, the bill would specify that individual providers employed by a predecessor agency before January 1, 2026, shall retain employee status and not be required by the state to requalify to receive payment for providing in-home supportive services. Among other things, for purposes of collective bargaining, this bill would provide that existing bargaining units consisting of individual providers in a single county that are represented by the same recognized employee organization shall be deemed merged into the largest possible multicounty bargaining units represented by that employee organization. In counties where no recognized employee organization exists as of January 1, 2026, the bill would specify that a bargaining unit consisting of all employees in that county shall be deemed an appropriate unit for collective bargaining. Under the bill, if individual providers in a county bargaining unit are represented by a recognized employee organization on January 1, 2026, the state would be deemed the successor employer of the predecessor agency for purposes of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement, subject to the obligation to meet and confer in good faith and meet other related legal requirements. This bill would require all recognized employee organizations, as of January 1, 2026, to negotiate jointly on behalf of all bargaining units they represent to reach a single memorandum of understanding with the employer. The bill would authorize the memorandum of understanding to contain addenda reflecting regional or county-level terms and conditions. The bill would establish procedures for voting and ratification of a memorandum of understanding, and for the employer to assume a predecessor agency's rights and obligations under a memorandum of understanding or agreement between a predecessor agency and a recognized employee organization that is in effect on January 1, 2026. This bill would prescribe the duties of the state under the bill, including requiring the Governor to meet and confer in good faith, and to follow specified procedures regarding collective bargaining. If an agreement is reached by a representative of the Governor and the recognized employee organizations, the bill would require those parties to jointly prepare a written memorandum of understanding and present it to the Legislature for determination by majority vote. The bill would require the Governor, for any side letter, appendix, or other addendum to a memorandum of understanding that requires the expenditure of $250,000 or more related to salary and benefits not included in the original memorandum or the Budget Act, to provide that to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, as specified. The bill would also establish mediation and arbitration procedures that would apply when the parties fail to reach an agreement. This bill would make certain actions by an employer and other entities involved in administering the IHSS program unlawful, including imposing or threatening to impose reprisals on employees or otherwise interfering with the exercise of their rights. The bill would authorize the Public Employment Relations Board to adopt reasonable rules and regulations pursuant to the bill, including the adoption of emergency regulations, as prescribed. (2) Existing law requires the Controller to provide for the administration of payroll deductions and salary reductions, and authorizes the Controller to establish procedures for that purpose. This bill would require the Controller to honor a written authorization for payroll deductions executed by an employee before January 1, 2026, and to make deductions for payments of dues to a recognized employee organization pursuant to the bill consistent with the above-described payroll deduction procedures. (3) Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires public records to be open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency that retains those records, and provides that every person has a right to inspect any public record, except as provided. Existing law provides that certain information regarding persons paid by the state to provide in-home supportive services, or other related public services, are not subject to disclosure under those provisions. Existing law further provides that copies of names, addresses, home telephone numbers, and other identifying information are required to be made available, upon request, to an exclusive bargaining agent and to any employee organization seeking representation rights under specified collective bargaining provisions. This bill would, with respect to the above-described personal identifying information, instead require this information to be made available to the exclusive bargaining agent and any employee organization seeking representation under the bill. The bill would require the state, or a county, public authority, or nonprofit consortium organized pursuant to the IHSS program, to promptly make the information available to the requesting entity. This bill would revise the IHSS program provisions to require the state to assume responsibilities as set forth in the bill. The bill would also require a county or city and county to continue to have certain IHSS program-related functions set forth in county ordinance or contract performed in accordance with specified provisions. (4) Existing law requires prospective providers of in-home supportive services to complete an in-person provider orientation at the time of enrollment that is developed by the department, in consultation with counties, that includes requirements to be an eligible IHSS provider and other related matters. This bill additionally would require that in-person provider orientation include any other information required to be communicated to prospective providers by a memorandum of understanding, appendix, or side letter between recognized employee organizations and the state. Existing law requires a specified mediation process, including a factfinding panel recommending settlement terms, to be held if a public authority or nonprofit consortium and an employee organization fail to reach agreement on a bargaining contract with in-home supportive service (IHSS) workers on or after October 1, 2023. This bill would make that provision inoperative. The bill would also require the department to appoint an IHSS Advisory Committee to provide ongoing advice and recommendations regarding in-home supportive services, as specified. The bill would require the employer, prior to finalizing a memorandum of understanding with one or more organizations that are the designated representatives of in-home services providers, to consult with specified advisory committee representatives to obtain input on county and public authority programmatic and fiscal implications. Existing law requires the state and counties to share the annual cost of providing IHSS pursuant to a specified cost ratio. Existing law requires all counties to have a rebased County IHSS Maintenance of Effort (MOE) , and requires the rebased MOE to be adjusted only by an inflation factor of 4% and for the annualized cost of increases in provider wages, health benefits, or other benefits that are locally negotiated, mediated, or imposed, as prescribed. This bill would prohibit the rebased County IHSS MOE from being adjusted based on any provision of any memorandum of understanding, or addenda, appendices, or side letters thereto, between the state and recognized employee organizations. Existing law requires the state to pay 100% of the allowable nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs for each county, until the county's share of the General Fund moneys appropriated for this purpose is exhausted, and then requires the county to pay 100% of the remaining nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs, as specified. This bill would require the state to also pay 100% of the nonfederal share of county administration and public authority administration costs for each county of any administration costs resulting from the provisions of any memorandum of understanding, or addenda, appendices, or side letters thereto, between the state and recognized employee organizations. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public. This bill would exempt the IHSS Advisory Committee from the act. This bill would make other related changes. By imposing new duties on local government officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (5) This bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern and, therefore, apply to all counties. (6) The California Constitution requires local agencies, for the purpose of ensuring public access to the meetings of public bodies and the writings of public officials and agencies, to comply with a statutory enactment that amends or enacts laws relating to public records or open meetings and contains findings demonstrating that the enactment furthers the constitutional requirements relating to this purpose. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (7) Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. (8) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

• Amended 08/29/25 - Amended Senate Current pdf August 29, 2025
• Amended 06/12/25 - Amended Senate pdf June 12, 2025
• Introduced 01/22/25 - Introduced pdf January 22, 2025
• AB283 View text html

Action History

1. September 09, 2025

   Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Durazo.

2. September 02, 2025

   Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

3. August 29, 2025

   From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 29).

4. August 29, 2025

   Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

5. July 14, 2025

   In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

6. July 02, 2025

   From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 1.) (July 1). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

7. June 18, 2025

   From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 18). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

8. June 12, 2025

   From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

9. June 11, 2025

   Referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and JUD.

10. May 29, 2025

    In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

11. May 29, 2025

    Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 64. Noes 4. Page 1784.)

12. May 27, 2025

    Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

13. May 23, 2025

    From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 2.) (May 23).

14. May 23, 2025

    Coauthors revised.

15. April 23, 2025

    In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.

16. March 19, 2025

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (March 19). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

17. March 19, 2025

    Coauthors revised.

18. February 10, 2025

    Referred to Com. on P. E. & R.

19. January 23, 2025

    From printer. May be heard in committee February 22.

20. January 22, 2025

    Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

• Jasmeet Bains · Cosponsor
• Joaquin Arambula · Cosponsor
• Tina McKinnor · Cosponsor
• Isaac G. Bryan · Cosponsor
• Matt Haney · Primary
• Josh Lowenthal · Cosponsor
• Ávila Farías · Cosponsor
• Mia Bonta · Cosponsor
• Avelino Valencia · Cosponsor
• Chris Rogers · Cosponsor
• Sharon Quirk-Silva · Cosponsor
• Alex Lee · Cosponsor
• Maggy Krell · Cosponsor
• Corey A. Jackson · Cosponsor
• Mike A. Gipson · Cosponsor
• Heath Flora · Cosponsor
• Sade Elhawary · Cosponsor
• Arreguín · Cosponsor
• Wiener · Cosponsor
• Cervantes · Cosponsor
• Durazo · Cosponsor
• Menjivar · Cosponsor
• Padilla · Cosponsor
• Rick Chavez Zbur · Cosponsor
• John Harabedian · Cosponsor
• Tasha Boerner · Cosponsor
• Mark González · Cosponsor
• David Alvarez · Cosponsor
• Patrick Ahrens · Cosponsor
• Esmeralda Soria · Cosponsor
• LaShae Sharp-Collins · Cosponsor
• Robert Garcia · Cosponsor
• Jessica Caloza · Cosponsor
• Steve Bennett · Cosponsor

Votes

Subjects