Legislative Update Desc

Jennifer Tiedeken-Cron

The Latest on SB 1203

SB 1203 Campaign Update: The Fight Continues

Governor Newsom now has less than three weeks to take action on SB 1203. We have very compelling arguments against the bill and need to maintain pressure on the Governor’s Office to veto it.

Legislative Update

The lobbying team continues to meet with the Governor’s key staff to urge a veto.

Coalition for a Safe & Secure California

Total Coalition Members: 67

  • Statewide Business & Chambers of Commerce: 17
  • Minority & Ethnic Business Advocacy: 2
  • Small Business & Industry: 45
  • Senior & Consumer: 2
  • Social Justice: 2
  • Taxpayers: 1

We launched an Activation Toolkit to equip partners with the resources to submit letters to the Governor, call his office, and share selfie style videos telling their personal stories. This phase is focused on clearly communicating the impact of SB 1203 to the Governor and his office, while strategically engaging our organizational partners and their members to generate broad participation and, importantly, quality contacts with the Governor’s office.

Several partners generated hundreds of direct phone calls and delivered 10 letters to the Governor’s office, including from small private security companies and organizations such as United Latinos Action, California Consumer Advocates, the Gaslamp Quarter Association, the Long Beach Chamber of Commerce, and more.

Communications

A veto press release was sent to Capitol press corps reporters, with a focus on how this legislation is bad for workers.

Overall, news coverage of SB 1203, primarily generated by the CALSAGA team, has produced 101 stories across the internet, including most major news outlets in the Sacramento region, and landed on websites with a combined monthly visitor count of 1,062,191,320. Over 25,000 journalists were reached through the outreach.

Paid Outreach

Five weeks into the campaign against SB 1203, we’ve surpassed 4.25 million total views across Facebook/Instagram, X, and Programmatic.

The campaign is deliberately targeting the audience closest to the Governor’s office, and increasing how often they see the ads, to make sure this message sticks. On Facebook and Instagram alone, this key audience has now seen the ads 1,534,700 times: 410,387 as static ads and 1,124,313 as video ads.

The strategy is straightforward: put this issue in front of the people who shape the Governor’s decisions as often as it takes to make sure it can’t be ignored, with the overall goal of encouraging Newsom to veto the bill.

What Can You Do?

/by
Jennifer Tiedeken-Cron

CALSAGA Is Fighting SB 1203 in the Capitol Until the Vote

CALSAGA Is Fighting SB 1203 in the Capitol Until the Vote

With the Assembly floor vote on SB 1203 set for August 31, CALSAGA’s lobbying team has been in the Capitol rotunda, meeting face to face with legislators to make our industry’s case.

Kelly Jensen of Sloat Higgins Jensen and Associates, CALSAGA’s lobbying firm, has been walking the halls, sitting down with lawmakers and their staff, and laying out exactly what this bill would cost California’s security industry and the businesses that depend on it.

What SB 1203 Would Do

SB 1203, authored by Senator Smallwood-Cuevas, would add an estimated $2 billion a year to the cost of security services statewide. It layers new training mandates, paid training time, and recurring compliance requirements onto an industry that already meets some of the toughest licensing standards in the country, and it hands responsibility for that training to an entity with no demonstrated security industry expertise.

Roughly 360,000 licensed security professionals in California would be affected.

We support real training and professionalism for our workforce. That is not in question. What we oppose is a bill that drives up costs so far that businesses are pushed toward cutting security staff or leaning on cameras and technology that cannot step in during an actual emergency. Trained security officers provide something a camera never can: an immediate, capable human presence.

Why We’re Showing Up in Person

Letters and emails matter, and CALSAGA members have sent plenty of both. But in the final stretch before a floor vote, nothing replaces a direct conversation. That is why our lobbying team has made the rotunda a regular stop, working alongside partners including the California Business Properties Association to keep our opposition in front of every legislator who will cast a vote.

This is what advocacy looks like: showing up, making the case, and doing it again.

Where Things Stand

The bill is headed for an Assembly floor vote on August 31, with the possibility of another round in the Senate after that. CALSAGA remains firmly opposed. Our position has not changed with the amendments the bill has already picked up, because those changes have not meaningfully reduced the cost impact on our industry.

We will keep members updated as the vote approaches and as the bill’s path through the Legislature becomes clearer.

Want to help? Look up your Assembly member’s contact information and give their office a call before the August 31 vote. Need help making the ask? Our lawmaker outreach guide walks you through what to say.

 

/by
Jennifer Tiedeken-Cron

CALSAGA Calls on Assembly to Reject Bill That Would Make Professional Security Unaffordable

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 26, 2026

 

CALSAGA Calls on Assembly to Reject Bill That Would

Make Professional Security Unaffordable

Legislation threatens public safety and jeopardizes security staffing

ahead of 2028 LA Olympic Games

 

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The California Association of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards & Associates (CALSAGA) is calling on the state Assembly to reject legislation that would impose sweeping new training mandates on security guards, at a cost of billions to the organizations relying on trained and licensed security officers. These costs would be so steep that businesses from large to small will be forced to eliminate this essential protection, replacing it with unlicensed staff or unmanned surveillance right when the state needs its security workforce the most.

The impact would extend far beyond business. Cities, counties, and state agencies across California rely on licensed security guards to protect schools, government offices, courthouses, and other public property. Taxpayers would ultimately absorb hundreds of millions of dollars in new costs as public sector budgets are forced to stretch further to maintain basic protection of government facilities and the communities they serve.

The need for private security is only growing. California hospitals have reported thousands of violent incidents annually, retail theft continues to hit businesses and consumers hard and reported hate crimes remain near historic highs at schools, houses of worship, and community centers. Ninety percent of businesses that rely on security officers are small businesses, operating on the same tight margins as the schools, hospitals, and local governments this bill would burden.

With millions of people from across the globe set to descend on Los Angeles for the 2028 Olympic Games, CALSAGA warns that lawmakers are on the verge of gutting the very workforce California will depend on to keep venues, transit systems, and public spaces secure.

Communities that would be most impacted, including small businesses, communities of color, building managers, hospitality, residential properties, are coming together to voice their opposition to this bill that puts public safety at risk. This includes California Small Business Association, Greater Los Angeles Hospitality Association, Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles, California Business Properties Association, California Hispanic and Asian Chambers of Commerce.

“I spent my career protecting the public, and I know what it takes to keep people safe at scale,” said Ralph Ruedas, retired Los Angeles County Deputy Sheriff. “You cannot replace a trained, licensed guard with a camera or an empty post. If this bill drives security companies out of business, the state will be walking into the Olympics with fewer trained guards on the ground, not more. That is a public safety risk California cannot afford to take.”

 

CALSAGA and its members have long championed training for licensed security officers, but this bill is the wrong approach.

 

“California already maintains among the highest standards for private security in the country, with strict licensing, background checks, and training requirements. Many licensed companies already go well beyond the state minimum, and our industry supports strengthening those standards further,” said David Chandler, President of CALSAGA. “What we can’t support is a bill that piles new costs on top of a system that already works. Employers are stretched thin enough as it is, and lawmakers need to reject this bill before it costs us the guards who keep our communities safe.”

ABOUT: CALSAGA represents approximately 3,000 licensed security employers and more than 360,000 licensed security professionals across California.

 

Media Contact: Nicole Evans

916-502-2756

[email protected]

/by
Jennifer Tiedeken-Cron

CALSAGA Launches Statewide Ad Campaign Opposing SB 1203, Warning the Bill’s $2 Billion Cost Poses Threat to Public Safety

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — The California Association of Licensed Security Agencies, Guards & Associates (CALSAGA) today launched a six-figure advertising campaign opposing SB 1203, warning that the bill’s $2 billion cost will make security unaffordable for hospitals, malls, grocery stores, and office buildings across California. Roughly 90% of businesses that use security guards are small businesses, which will be left to absorb the hike or go without protection.

The bill repeats the mistakes of the state’s fast-food minimum wage law, which resulted in fewer restaurant workers and more customers relying on self-service kiosks. Facing the same cost pressure, businesses that rely on security guards will have to stop using them altogether or raise prices for their customers, just as fast-food restaurants did.

The campaign’s centerpiece :60 video, “When Will They Learn?” opens on the guards Californians count on every day, calling out the bill’s exorbitant cost on public safety, drawing a direct connection to the unintended consequences of the fast-food minimum wage law.

“Right now, someone is standing guard at your hospital, your office building, your neighborhood store, but here’s the latest special interest scheme in Sacramento. They want to make it harder to hire security guards, all while adding $2 billion in security costs to California businesses,” the ad states. “Our state’s small businesses, already stretched thin, will be the ones left picking up the tab.”

SB 1203 would reconstitute the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC), dormant since 2004, and grant it authority to set wages for California’s licensed security workforce, without accountability to voters or any obligation to conduct a market analysis.

“This bill will hurt the very people it’s trying to help,” said David Chandler, president of CALSAGA. “Sacramento already tried this with fast-food wages, and workers lost hours and jobs. This time, the cost isn’t ordering a burger on a touchscreen, it’s a hospital, school, or mall with no trained guard on duty.”

The bill would also shift guard training over to an unnamed entity that has no experience and expertise in training guards currently protecting public agencies and businesses across California. It would eliminate established training programs and agencies, which all follow the strict guidelines and training protocols established by the state Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, and hand over the responsibility to a new entity that has no infrastructure to rapidly scale training once the bill would take effect in July 2028, just weeks from the opening of the LA Olympic Games.

“We support strong training standards, but we can’t scrap our established training system and hand it over to an untested entity with no security expertise or infrastructure to train 360,000 guards just before California hosts the LA 2028 Olympics,” said Chandler. “This is reckless and a public safety risk the state can’t afford to take.”

SB 1203 is currently before the state Senate Appropriations Committee. If it clears the Senate, the bill will head to the Governor’s desk.

ABOUT: CALSAGA represents approximately 3,000 licensed security employers and more than 360,000 licensed security professionals across California.

Media Contact: Nicole Evans

916-502-2756

[email protected]

/by
Aley Moyer

THE CALIFORNIAN 2026 Q1 – WOTC LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: WHAT PENDING CHANGES COULD MEAN FOR EMPLOYERS IN 2026

, ,

WOTC Legislative Update: What Pending Changes Could Mean for Employers in 2026

Marcel Abandonato, MJA & Associates, CALSAGA Associate Member

As Congress continues discussions around federal workforce and tax policy, the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) is once again in focus. Proposed legislation aimed at enhancing and modernizing the program could reshape how employers calculate credits, qualify new hires, and capture savings.

For businesses that rely on hiring incentives to control labor costs, the outcome of this legislation could have a meaningful financial impact.

Now is the time to understand what’s changing — and how to prepare.

Why WOTC Still Matters

For over 25 years, the Work Opportunity Tax Credit has helped employers reduce federal tax liability while expanding opportunities for individuals facing barriers to employment.

Employers may earn credits of up to $2,400–$9,600 per eligible hire, depending on the target group and hours worked.

Common qualifying groups include:

  • Veterans
  • SNAP recipients
  • Long-term unemployed individuals
  • Ex-felons
  • SSI recipients
  • Youth employees in designated areas

For many organizations — especially those in security, staffing, retail, hospitality, manufacturing, and healthcare — WOTC represents six- and seven-figure annual tax savings.

What’s Being Proposed in Congress

While final language is still being negotiated, current proposals suggest several enhancements to strengthen and extend the program:

Expanded eligibility
Additional target groups may be added, allowing more new hires to qualify.

Updated credit structure
Discussions include adjusting wage caps and credit percentages to better reward long-term employment.

Program modernization
Streamlined documentation and certification processes could reduce administrative burdens and improve processing timelines.

Long-term stability
Lawmakers are signaling support for making WOTC a more predictable, long-term workforce incentive rather than a short-term extension.

If enacted, these updates could increase available credits while simplifying compliance — a win for both employers and job seekers.

What Employers Should Do Now

Even before legislation is finalized, proactive businesses can position themselves to maximize savings:

– Review your current WOTC capture rate

Are you screening 100% of new hires? Many companies miss 20–40% of eligible credits due to process gaps.

– Strengthen onboarding workflows

Ensure applications, prescreens, and documentation are completed accurately and on time.

– Align recruiting with incentives

Expanded eligibility may open opportunities to target new workforce segments strategically.

– Prepare for quick implementation

When changes pass, early adopters typically benefit most.

The Opportunity Ahead

Whether the legislation expands credits, simplifies processes, or both, one thing is clear:
WOTC remains one of the most valuable and underutilized tax incentives available to employers.

Organizations that stay informed and optimize their programs stand to gain a significant competitive advantage.

Ready to Maximize Your WOTC Savings?

If you’re unsure whether your current process is capturing every available dollar — or want guidance on how upcoming legislation could affect your business — now is the perfect time for a review.

MJA & Associates has helped employers for over 20 years reduce tax liability through WOTC and other employment-based incentives.

We can help you:

  • Evaluate your current WOTC performance
  • Identify missed credits
  • Improve compliance and documentation
  • Prepare for upcoming legislative changes
  • Automate and streamline your process

Contact us today for a complimentary WOTC program review or consultation.

For more information or to learn more about WOTC please contact

Marcel Abandonato at [email protected] or call 951.272.8294.

Marcel Abandonato is the President and CEO of MJA & Associates, Inc., a leading provider of Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) consulting and compliance services. For more than two decades, Marcel has worked with businesses across the country to unlock millions of dollars in federal tax credits by implementing compliant, efficient, and scalable WOTC programs.

Marcel is widely regarded as a subject-matter expert on WOTC legislation, program renewals, and best practices—particularly for security firms,staffing firms, multi-state employers, and organizations with high-volume hiring. Under his leadership, MJA & Associates partners with leading HR and staffing technology platforms to modernize WOTC screening and processing, helping employers improve participation rates and maximize return on investment.

/by
Kate

The Californian 2021 Q3 – LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE

Kate Wallace, CALSAGA Association Manager

As we reported to you earlier this year, Assemblymember Chris Holden introduced Assembly Bill 229 which would require the development of Use of Force curriculum for the private security industry. Among other topics the training would include active shooter situations; implicit and explicit bias and cultural competency; mental health and policies.

The CALSAGA Executive Committee along with our lobbyist Kelly Jensen have been working with Assemblymember Holden’s office, the Committee Consultant for the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee and Chief Andres of the Bureau of Security & Investigative Services on the text and ramifications of the bill. CALSAGA President David Chandler has testified before Assembly and Senate committees regarding the bill.

The current draft of the bill would remove Weapons of Mass Destruction from Powers to Arrest and replace it with Use of Force. Weapons of Mass Destruction will become an elective option.  It would require the initial guard card training to be administered in a traditional classroom setting with a physical instructor utilizing “hands-on training.” Originally the legislation would have increased the initial training requirement from 8 hours to 10 hours. CALSAGA addressed this with Assemblymember Holden and are glad to report that he is agreeable to keeping the initial training as an 8 hour course.

Proposed legislation would also increase requirements for reporting altercations. Currently all physical interactions involving a security officer must be reported to the BSIS. If passed, this legislation would require that any altercation be reported to the BSIS. This would include verbal altercations and unwanted touches such as common instances of gently touching an individual’s shoulder to guide them out of a building, officers restraining someone in a hospital setting, etc.

Last Tuesday David Chandler testified before the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Development Committee in opposition to the bill as currently written. There are portions of the legislation to which the association objects particularly the barrier to employment created by the increased training requirements and the lack of provisions for administering training in the event of a future pandemic.

During committee session this week, Assemblymember Holden stated, “I have committed to CALSAGA that I will work with them to find an appropriate balance between traditional classroom and their suggestion of web-based platform training.”

CALSAGA will continue to keep you updated regarding AB 229. Should this legislation pass, new requirements would not take effect until 2022.

/by
Kate

The Californian 2019 Q2 – U.S. SUPREME COURT: COURTS MAY ONLY COMPEL CLASS-WIDE ARBITRATION IF EXPRESSLY AGREED UPON IN EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION AGREEMENT

, ,

U.S. SUPREME COURT: COURTS MAY ONLY COMPEL CLASS-WIDE ARBITRATION IF EXPRESSLY AGREED UPON IN EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION AGREEMENT

Jaimee K. Wellerstein, Esq., Bradley & Gmelich, CALSAGA Network Partner

In a split 5-4 decision in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, No. 17-988 (Apr. 24, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court held that courts may only compel class action arbitration where the parties expressly declare their intent to be bound by such actions in their arbitration agreement. The holding and rationale are important to employers because the Court decisively ruled that class arbitration “fundamentally” changes the nature of the “traditional individualized arbitration” envisioned by the Federal Arbitration Act. Thus, the Supreme Court said, “Courts may not infer from an ambiguous agreement that parties have consented to arbitrate on a classwide basis.”

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, arbitration agreements must unequivocally state that the parties agree to resolve class actions through arbitration in order to proceed this way. Courts cannot compel the parties to arbitration when an arbitration agreement is ambiguous about the availability of class arbitration.

Employer Takeaway: This ruling is a win for employers. Courts can no longer impose class-wide arbitration unless the employer’s arbitration agreement clearly authorizes this. Only express agreements between the parties can lead to class arbitration. Companies, along with their counsel, should review their employment arbitration agreements to determine whether they comply with the SCOTUS standards.

Jaimee K. Wellerstein is a Partner at Bradley & Gmelich LLP, and the Head of the firm’s Employment Department. Jaimee concentrates her practice in representing employers in all aspects of employment law, including defense of wage and hour class actions, PAGA claims, discrimination, retaliation, harassment, wrongful discharge, misclassification, and other employment related lawsuits. She also provides employment counseling and training in all of these areas. Jaimee routinely represents employers in federal and state courts and in arbitration proceedings throughout the state, as well as at administrative proceedings before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the California Department of Labor Standards Enforcement, the United States Department of Labor, and other federal and state agencies. Jaimee assists as a Legal Advisor to CALSAGA, and is a member of ASIS International. She is rated AV-Preeminent by Martindale Hubbel, the highest peer rating available. [email protected] 818-243-5200.

/by
Kate

THE CALIFORNIAN 2018 Q3 – CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DECISION REDEFINES THE GUIDELINES OF INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS

, ,

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT DECISION REDEFINES THE GUIDELINES OF INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS

Shaun Kelly, Tolman & Wiker, CALSAGA Preferred Broker

On April 30, 2018, The California Supreme Court issued a ruling in Dynamex Operations West. Inc. v. Superior Court, making it much more difficult to classify an individual as an independent contractor (rather than employee). The previous standard for classifying individuals as employees or independent contractors had been in place since the 1980’s and was based on a multi-factor test that considered, among other factors, the individual’s abilities, the method of payment, and the extent of control exercised over individual. In the Dynamex ruling, the Supreme Court adopted a new three-part “ABC Test” that is intended to reduce the use of independent contractors in the California workforce.

The new standard adopted by the California Supreme Court requires the hirer to establish three factors in order to properly classify a worker as an independent contractor – and in the process greatly expands the definition of “employee” under California law. Here is the information to classify an individual as an Independent Contractor:

Is free from the control and direction of the hirer in connection with the performance of the work, both under contract for the performance of such work and in fact; and

Performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and

Is customarily engaged in an independent established trade, occupation or business.

All three are required in order to fulfill the test.

Even though the “ABC Test” is written to simplify the definition of independent contractor, the application of the three part test is not going to be that simple. It will be the hirer’s responsibility to satisfy the “ABC Test” in order to lawfully classify an individual as an independent contractor. Please keep in mind, this decision was made under the Wage Orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission. As we all know, there will more than likely be subsequent cases, actions and rulings that will be restricting or expanding the Court’s decision to other state department (i.e. Workers’ Compensation).

So, if you are hiring independent contractors or being hired as an independent contractor, now is the time to review the following regarding the new “ABC Test”:

-Identify your independent contractor relationships

-Description of duties of those relationships to the “ABC Test”

-Review contracts involving independent contractors

-Prepare a file for each relationship to include name, description of duties, FEIN#, insurance certificates…

-And any additional information to support the independent contractor relationship (Remember, independent contractors must have the ability to work for multiple clients and they provide their own tools and materials to complete the job free from control of the hirer)

 

Thank you for taking the time to read the article.

Shaun Kelly joined Tolman & Wiker Insurance Services in 2005.  He specializes in all lines of property and casualty insurance for industries including contract security firms, agriculture, construction, oil and gas. Shaun received a BS in Business Administration with a major in Finance from California State University in Fresno, California. He is an active member of several industry associations, including the Association CALSAGA, the Kern County Builders Exchange and the Independent Insurance Agents of Kern County. Shaun can be reached at 661-616-4700 or [email protected].

/by