For a more in depth discussion of Proposition 11, and the ten other initiatives on the ballot this November you can watch the forum in its entirety on YouTube or read the full analyses here. And keep your eyes peeled on The CAP⋅impact Podcast’s feed on Apple Podcasts, Stitcher Radio, or wherever you get your podcasts from for analysis of this year’s ballot initiatives in your headphones coming next week.
Proposition 11: Emergency Ambulance Employees Safety and Preparedness Act
- Federal law – Under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, emergency employees may not receive compensation for interrupted breaks.
- State law – Under the California Labor Code, employer-mandated on-call rest breaks are illegal.
- CA Supreme Court – In Augustus v. ABM Security Services (2016), the California Supreme Court held that on-call breaks violate state labor law. Full compliance with the Augustus decision would potentially increase costs for ambulance providers by more than $100,000 annually.
- Allows emergency medical technicians (EMTs) and paramedics to remain on-call during breaks.
- Requires employers to pay EMTs and paramedics at their regular rates during their breaks.
- Requires 911 ambulance operators to maintain high staffing levels to provide coverage for breaks.
- Requires training for certain emergency incidents related to active shooters, multiple casualties, natural disasters, and violence prevention.
- Requires employers to provide employees mandatory mental health coverage, as well as yearly mental health and wellness training.
- Retroactively prevents emergency employees from bringing claims pursuant to Augustus against ambulance service providers, including claims already pending.
|Yes on Proposition 11
|No on Proposition 11
Analysis of Proposition 11 provided by Anupe Litt and David Witkin.