SB553 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What does SB 553 in reality do?

SB 553, as currently passed does:

  • Define the “Threat of violence” to include at a minimum, “texts, electronic messages, social media messages, or other online posts, or any behavioral or physical conduct.”
  • Define “Workplace violence” to include “psychological trauma, or stress, regardless of whether the employee sustains an injury.”
  • Provide the employer the opportunity to file a Temporary Restraining Order on behalf of the employee.
  • Require “Engineering Controls” to prevent the “Violence.”
  • Pass the Violence Plan Requirements to Cal/OSHA to expand as it “deems necessary and appropriate to protect the health and safety of employees.” So, Cal/OSHA could add requirements beyond what was even fought for in the amendments.
  • Require employers to maintain Violent Incident Logs of crimes against employees , employers, and customers, including texts, verbal, or social media. This log doesn’t prevent violence and is an added cost to businesses. What exactly is the State of California going to do with this information other than punish businesses for not keeping or maintaining the log?
  • Falsely presume that the employee training will somehow prevent the active shooters from committing crimes. Employees will never be as well-trained as law enforcement.
  • Create liability and lawsuits for employees to claim stress or that the small employer did not keep a perfect log.
  • Put the unnecessary burden of regulations on small employers that was required for the healthcare industry which has a much higher income stream than mom-and-pop businesses.

Are under 10 employees exempt from the law?

Cal/OSHA doesn’t require the documentation for Illness and Injuries Prevention Program (IIPP) for a company with a total 10 employees or less. That is existing law in 6401.7. The new law Workplace Violence Plan (WVP) is not only about the record keeping. It has its own new section 6401.9 (WVP) that requires all employees to be covered. We need to act if an employee gets threatened, even on social media. In short, NO you are not exempt. Any public place is subject to the law. What happens if your employee claims that they can’t come to work because they were forwarded social media posts about a store in the area getting shoplifted and now they are stressed? What happens if a mentally ill person walks into a public small business and starts screaming at the employees?

Doesn't this help employers because now they can file restraining orders?

Although the legislation language about employee representatives being a petitioner for workplace violence is well-meaning, it does not actually prevent the violence it seeks to eliminate when the court system places such a high burden on imposing restraining orders. Restraining orders without police corroboration are seldom granted by the court. Criminals and shoplifters do not care about these pieces of paper. They will move on to another store at another location to continue with their criminal activities. This only penalizes the employer for failure to seek one when they had the opportunity to do so.

Isn't Stopping Workplace Violence a good thing?

If a criminal enters your home, and robs  you, do you call it “Domestic Violence?” No you call it for the crime it is. This bill does nothing to stop “Workplace Violence,” it just passes financial, work, regulatory, and legal stress on to employers. It cleverly intermixes workplace hazards and violence to conflate the two issues. Small employers do not have the capacity to enact any of that. Small Business was not cut out of this Bill. It will have a dramatic effect on Workman’s Compensation Insurance and those insurers will move out of California and kill small business owners.

Didn't they pass amendments to address our concerns?

Out of the frying pan, and into the fryer, as they say. Those deals were made with the lobbyists for Large Retailers. Additionally, in a classic “bait-and-switch” they removed language everyone opposed about shoplifting, but, expanded the definition of Violence to include text messages, social media, etc. They also gave Cal/OSHA the authority to pass anything they deem “necessary and appropriate” by December 31st, 2025. What is to stop Cal/OSHA from adding back the very same language on shoplifting that was just removed?

How does SB 553 seek to prevent workplace violence?

A shooter-specific training for employees does not prevent the criminals from committing the violence or crime. How can their training prevent violence, if employees are not responsible for the violence? This legislation also passes the buck to employers to pay for this training. Small businesses in California can barely afford to survive due to the rising costs of business (inflation), higher wages, and Covid losses they sustained.

Why does SB 553 refer to the workplace violence protection required for the healthcare industry?

The healthcare industry has different risks, challenges, and workplace setups than retail businesses. The healthcare industry is professionally trained and educated, and expected to deal with the mentally challenged, drug addicts, current inmates, etc. Prevention of Type1 and Type2 workplace violence as defined by Cal/OSHA healthcare requires special safety equipment, special training, and education which is not possible with the limited resources from a retail business. This limitation puts employees, employers, and customers even at greater risk of violence. Additionally, the employees of the healthcare industry do not share the same physical work/office areas as their employees, whereas most of the small retail business employers share the same physical space as their employees. So the risk of workplace violence is the same for both employees and employers in the case of small retail businesses. The solution is not more laws to force employers to protect their employees. The solution is to enforce existing laws and to eliminate or revise laws that give criminals a free pass.

Doesn't this bill affect Large Retailers too?

Large retailers already have Human Resources, Loss Prevention, and other mechanisms in place that small mom-and-pop businesses do not. They are happy to see small business die because it means more market share for them. We are talking about people who may own 3 small mini-marts and have 15-18 employees. If they went away, the Big Retailers would reap the benefits. The poorer areas that are food deserts would suffer the most.

Where can I read more?

See our current Analysis of SB553 at SB 553 Analysis – Association of Small Retail Owners

Where are ASRO members located?

ASRO has at least 1 member in every Senate district and in 71 California Assembly districts. We are working on adding members in the last 9 districts. Thanks to the outrage, this number is growing day by day. We will keep this list updated on a weekly basis.

1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
24
25
26
27
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
53
54
55
56
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80