Author: John Kabateck

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and policy, and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators. This is the fifth column of that series.

Sadly, small businesses aren’t all that surprised these days when the California Legislature tries to erect yet another roadblock that will further block economic or job growth on Main Street in our state. But what small employers did not know or anticipate is that a little-known, quasi-judicial state board would give our elected leaders a run for their money by taking the greatest legislative achievement in the past half-decade – workers’ compensation reform – and completely rewriting legislation that has significantly benefited California employees and employers.

Recently, the NFIB Small Business Legal Center took on this grievous overreach by the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) and filed amicus briefs in the reconsideration of two pivotal cases (Almaraz v. Enviroserve and Ogilvie v. San Francisco) that affect California workers’ compensation system. The cases challenge workers’ compensation reforms that brought objectivity to the evaluation of permanent disabilities and disability benefits.

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators. This is the fifth column of that series.

In a less than a week, California voters will go to the polls once again. This time, they are being asked to consider several propositions that were put on the ballot as part of the budget deal that was struck earlier this year. Late last month, NFIB/CA formally opposed Proposition 1A after balloting our more than 21,000 members. Once again, the voice of small business was loud and clear – no more new taxes!

There is no doubt that the state is facing unprecedented troubling times. That is why it is especially concerning that the budget deal included new and unanticipated costs that struggling small businesses simply can’t afford to absorb, including an increase in income taxes, sales taxes and a near doubling of the car tax. During tough economic times such as these, heaping new costs upon California’s leading job creators should not be even a remote option when trying to balance the state’s budget.

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators. This is the fourth column of that series.

Back in 2003 and 2004, our legislators were actually able put aside their partisan differences and accomplish some great reforms to the workers compensation system in California. The average costs for insured employers have been reduced by 64 percent, more injured workers are getting back on the job and we have curtailed excessive use of medical service while preserving access to quality medical treatment. Even more important is that by 2007, taxpayers had saved nearly $2 billion through cost reductions for state and local governments.

Of course, our current legislators can’t leave well enough alone, so there has been a continuous attack on these reforms from the day they were signed. The latest in the bunch is SB 773 by Senator Florez, which would increase the permanent partial disability awards by more than 50 percent starting in 2010. This bill also short-circuits the established regulatory process for determining benefit calculations.

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators. This is the third column of that series.

It seems that our state legislators continue to experience a chronic case of short-term memory. It would be the only logical reason that they continue to propose bill after bill every year that add additional burdens and mandates to small businesses in California. The latest in the string of these “Menaces” is Assembly Bill 1000, by Assembly Member Fiona Ma.

This is an identical twin of last session’s AB 2716 by the same author – same bad policy, new bill number. It would require every California employer to provide each employee with paid sick leave. Once an employee works only seven days in California, they would start to earn paid sick leave benefits, and within 90 days they would be able to begin taking time off for themselves or relatives. This mandate covers seasonal and part-time employees and would be required regardless of an employer’s ability to pay. Furthermore, as a “gimme” to the trial lawyer lobby, it would include fines, penalties and the right to sue if an employer is unable to comply with this one-size-fits-all mandate.

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators.  This is the second column of that series.

"I’m from the government and I’m here to help."  Just hearing those words strikes fear in the hearts of hardworking small business owners everywhere.  In California it is especially frightening, given the number of onerous regulations, soaring costs, and other burdens that are regularly heaped upon the plates of small businesses.  Add to that the financial crisis facing the state with foreclosed homes, rising unemployment, and a growing state deficit, and government is not seen as a savior by most right now.

So in the middle of all this our legislature is once again considering yet another "law of unintended consequences", Senate Bill 810 (Leno), which would turn over our already-stressed healthcare system to an incapable, if not absentee, caretaker: our state government bureaucracy.

While the legislature is in session, the National Federation of Independent Business/California will be profiling anti-small business bills and the adverse effect they would have on California’s job creators. This is the first column of that series.

Former presidential candidate Sen. George McGovern has a message California’s legislators need to hear: “As Americans, we should strive to ensure that all of us enjoy the freedom of expression and freedom from fear that is our ideal and our right.” This progressive icon and pillar of the Democratic Party was addressing Congressional members of his own party and that party’s biggest financial supporter—labor unions.

This spring, Congress is expected to continue to discuss and debate unionization in the workplace through federal “card check” legislation, referred to by most as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). After reading the fine print, most would agree that a more appropriate name would be the “Employee Forced Choice Act.”

Some consolation for small business owners during the current economic crisis has been the positive impact the 2004 bipartisan workers’ compensation reforms have had on lowering insurance costs. After all, countless small businesses wouldn’t even be here to experience the worst recession in decades if Gov. Schwarzenegger hadn’t championed the passage of Senate Bill 899. As I travel throughout the state meeting with small business owners, they regularly cite the immense savings they’ve witnessed from these historic reforms – some savings in the thousands of dollars, but many saving upwards of ten thousand dollars or more. This is money they’ve been able to reinvest in employees, benefits and other efforts to promote and grow their small businesses.

The savings generated by those reforms – an average of 64 percent drop in insurance costs since 2003 – today could very well be the difference that’s keeping a small business afloat.
That’s why a recent column by The Sacramento Bee’s Dan Walters should send shivers down every employer’s spine. A review panel known as the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has gutted a major provision of the 2004 reforms that instituted a more objective and equitable system for providing permanently injured workers with cash benefits.

It has become increasingly evident to Capitol insiders, pundits and others that the Governor and Legislature may be close to reaching a budget “compromise” in the coming days.

As the leading representative group for California small businesses, we must ask: “What, in fact, is the true meaning of ‘compromise’ if it shutters the few remaining mom-and-pop businesses already on life support and sends the last batch of working Californians to the unemployment line?”

When it comes to identifying small business as a “priority issue”, many of our elected leaders surely make a valiant effort to “talk the talk” during campaign season, but a select few truly “walk the walk” when it comes to making important, sustainable decisions that will protect the very men, women and families that sent them to Sacramento in the first place.

Imagine if last November when you walked into your voting booth, the curtain was open and people were watching you vote. Now visualize these spectators are telling you how to vote.

Is that wrong? If you think so, then you would agree that attempts by organized labor to take away an employee’s long-standing right to privacy when voting on the critical issue of whether or not to be represented by an organized labor group.

In 2007, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 800, the sadistically-named “Employee Free Choice Act.” It should really be called the “Employee NO Choice Act,” because it rips away the curtain or privacy and may result in employees being forced to accept a government-negotiated wage and benefit contract.

Organizing by card check would be a radical change in union organizing. It initiates the union drive from outside the business, not by the employees themselves, and means that small business owners would be uninformed about organizing drives.