Status


PDF |Add To My Favorites | print page

AB-2052 Workers’ compensation.(2013-2014)

Senate:
1st
Cmt
2nd
3rd
Pass
Assembly:
1st
Cmt
2nd
Cmt
2nd
3rd
Pass
Pass
Veto
Bill Status
AB-2052
Gonzalez (A)
-
-
Workers’ compensation.
03/23/14
An act to amend Sections 3212.1, 3212.5, 3212.6, 3212.85, and 3212.9 of, and to repeal and add Section 3212 of, the Labor Code, relating to workers’ compensation.
Assembly
08/27/14
08/18/14

Type of Measure
Inactive Bill - Vetoed
Majority Vote Required
Non-Appropriation
Non-Fiscal Committee
Non-State-Mandated Local Program
Non-Urgency
Non-Tax levy
Last 5 History Actions
Date Action
09/29/14 Vetoed by Governor.
09/05/14 Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3:30 p.m.
08/25/14 Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 58. Noes 16. Page 6399.).
08/21/14 In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 23 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
08/21/14 Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 27. Noes 8. Page 4728.).
Governor's Veto Message
To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I am returning Assembly Bill 2052 without my signature.

This bill expands the categories of peace officers that are eligible for worker's compensation presumptions.

Current workers' compensation law provides coverage to certain categories of peace officers and firefighters for presumed compensable injuries. These presumptions, which include cancer, heart disease, pneumonia, hernia, bio-chemical illness, tuberculosis, and meningitis, were enacted in response to the types of hazards which these workers face. Over the course of many decades, California has expanded both the diseases and the kinds of safety employees which these presumptions cover.

This measure seeks to expand coverage to dozens of additional categories of officers without real evidence that these officers confront the hazards that gave rise to the presumptions codified in existing law. Presumptions should be used rarely and only when justified by clear and convincing scientific evidence.

Sincerely,



Edmund G. Brown Jr.