Executive Summary
After three readings, AB257 failed to pass the California Assembly. The bill may be reconsidered by the Assembly in January 2022.
Analysis
On June 3, 2021, the California Assembly considered AB257 and the bill failed to receive the 41 votes necessary to pass after three readings. Specifically, AB257 received 38 ayes, 27 noes, and 14 no votes recorded. As a result, the bill’s sponsor, State Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, filed a motion to have the bill reconsidered by the legislature in January 2022.
Looking Forward
While the franchise community should thank Jeff Hanscom and his team at the International Franchise Association for this surprising victory, the fight is not over. AB257 has many supporters in the labor community and it is likely that it will be revived in January of next year. If and when that occurs, the question then becomes what will it take for the bill to pass the Assembly and make it through the Senate. Based on floor debates, bill analysis, and bill coverage, it is likely that some form of the Fast Food Sector Council will be a part of the final bill but there is some hope–albeit slim–that the joint employer standard will not be. Nevertheless, this provides one more year of the status quo and, for that, the franchise community should be grateful.
This article was originally published on the California Franchise Network.
As always, our team stands ready to assist your business with all of its franchising needs. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact the authors listed below.
Thomas O’Connell – Tom O’Connell is a Shareholder at Buchalter APC, where he serves as Chair of the firm’s Franchise Law Practice and Chair of Litigation for the firm’s San Diego office.
This communication is not intended to create or constitute, nor does it create or constitute, an attorney-client or any other legal relationship. No statement in this communication constitutes legal advice nor should any communication herein be construed, relied upon, or interpreted as legal advice. This communication is for general information purposes only regarding recent legal developments of interest, and is not a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter. No reader should act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information included herein without seeking appropriate legal advice on the particular facts and circumstances affecting that reader. For more information, visit www.buchalter.com.
