AB 218 Webinar
Hosted by the League’s Employee Relations Department, the AB 218 implementation webinar will be held on Wednesday, May 14 from 10 – 11 a.m. Registration
is free but must be done by noon on Tuesday, May 13.
With the passage of AB 218, California follows a nationwide movement to "ban the box," which prohibits asking questions about convictions on the initial job application. Effective July 1, 2014, public employers must first determine if an applicant meets the minimum employment qualifications before requesting any criminal conviction information, except for job applicants to a criminal justice agency or where a criminal background check is required by law.
AB 1147 Webinar
The League is also holding a massage establishment regulation update webinar on Tuesday, May 20 to brief members on how AB 1147 differs from existing law regulating massage therapy businesses. Registration
is free for League members and partners; $100 for others. May 16 is the deadline to register.
Local governments across the state have been negatively impacted as a result of the unintended consequences of SB 731 (Oropeza, 2008) dealing with the voluntary certification of massage professional. Although this law was created with the best of intentions, it is clear now that in practice it is not working and needs to be changed. Creating professional standards for the massage industry is not at issue. However, where the massage industry sought to be treated “no better, no worse” than other professional service providers, SB 731 actually gives preferential treatment to massage businesses.
The League has been asking for four major changes to the massage law:
California Massage Therapy Council as a nonprofit should be eliminated in favor of a board or commission under the Department of Consumer Affairs;
Owners of massage businesses need to be held accountable for what goes on in their establishments;
The League is requesting local governments be allowed to apply reasonable regulations to massage businesses; and
Local governments need to recoup the costs of protecting the public. Because of the way the statute is written, the committee should clarify that local governments can charge fees for the costs of enforcement.
For registration questions, contact Megan Dunn