California’s AB 2930, a bill that sought to regulate automated decision tools (ADTs) that are used to make “consequential decisions” in employment, was defeated when the bill’s author moved it to the inactive file shortly before the conclusion of the legislative session for the California State Legislature.

AB 2930 would have imposed onerous responsibilities for impact assessments, disclosures, and governance programs on developers and deployers (employers) of artificial intelligence systems. Employers would also have an obligation, “where technically feasible,” to accommodate individual “opt-out” requests if “consequential decisions”—broadly defined to involve nearly every aspect of employment, including recruiting—were made based solely on the output of an ADT, and provide detailed notices to individual affected employees.

ASA and California Staffing Professionals, an ASA-affiliated chapter, adamantly opposed the bill. Led by longtime ASA lobbyist Mike Robson and his colleague Jason Ikerd, ASA submitted written testimony on multiple instances throughout the session and met with legislative leaders to express the industry’s concerns with the bill.

In its opposition, ASA noted the unique issues in regulating use of ADT to recruit temporary employees, the operational burden of “opt-outs” and prior- and post-consequential decision notices, and staffing firms’ inability to make “impact assessments” of ADT.

It is likely that the state legislature will revisit this topic next year, and ASA will continue to monitor similar bills seeking to regulate the use of AI in the employment context and engage as necessary.

Shortly before adjourning for the year, the Massachusetts legislature passed H 4890. Among other things, the law will require covered employers to disclose the pay range for any job postings and advertisements.

Led by Massachusetts lobbyists Tara O’Donnell and Roger Donaghue—and alongside representatives of the Massachusetts Staffing Association, an ASA-affiliated chapter—industry representatives met with key legislators to express concerns with the legislation as drafted.

The main concern was that the bill failed to consider that staffing agencies advertise jobs differently than most employers. Most employers hire for a specific current job opening, but staffing agencies often advertise for candidates who are generally qualified for a position (e.g., administrative assistant) without reference to a particular job. The purpose is to fill their pools of qualified applicants for potential job openings that may arise in the future. In such cases, no meaningful salary range can be given.

Lawmakers accepted the industry’s argument and amened the bill to require disclosure of pay ranges only for advertisements or job postings “for a particular and specific employment position.”

The law also requires covered employers to file an Employment Information Report (EEO–1), which they are required to submit annually to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, with the department of the Secretary of the Commonwealth. Staffing agencies must file EEO-1 reports only if they have 100 or more internal employees (50 or more for certain federal contractors). Under longstanding EEOC guidance, temporary employees can be excluded from the report and from the staffing agency’s headcount in determining whether it meets the 100 (or 50) employee threshold.

The salary disclosure provision of the law goes into effect July 31, 2025. Covered employers required to file EEO-1 reports must submit them to the state secretary no later than Feb. 1, 2025.

In the California State Senate, ACA 6—a proposed constitutional amendment to the California constitution that would have limited the ability of the University of California system to contract for services—was defeated during a recent meeting of the elections and constitutional amendments committee.

The UC system adamantly opposed the bill—with strong support from ASA and California Staffing Professionals, an ASA-affiliated chapter. Led by longtime ASA lobbyist Mike Robson and his colleague Jason Ikerd, ASA submitted written testimony and met with legislative leaders to express the industry’s concerns with the bill.

They noted that while the UC system strictly follows state public contracting laws, it still relies on contract workers for assignments that are highly specialized or to fill critical vacancies such as during staff absences and spikes in demand in the UC health care system. The bill was defeated when it failed to receive two-thirds of the vote in committee.

With little time left in the legislative session, legislative leaders had opted to advance ACA 6 instead of a similar bill (ACA 14, which relates to labor standards in the UC system) because ACA 6 was further along in the process. With the defeat of ACA 6, it is unlikely that ACA 14 will receive further consideration or be scheduled for a hearing. ASA will continue to monitor the bill and will renew its opposition if necessary.

California Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco) has decided not to advance AB 2741, a bill that would have imposed new rules on employers and staffing agencies that place contracted workers in the state, and has amended the bill to remove all references to staffing. The California State Assembly’s committee on labor and employment has confirmed that the bill has been pulled from the agenda. The bill would have imposed major new obligations and costs on staffing firms and clients. ASA and California Staffing Professionals, an ASA-affiliated chapter—led by longtime ASA lobbyist Mike Robson—mounted a comprehensive statewide lobbying campaign aimed at demonstrating that the bill was unnecessary and would do far more harm than good.

Earlier this year, the Iowa House of Representatives introduced HF 2391, a bill aimed at regulating temporary nurse staffing agencies. Among the provisions of the bill was language authorizing the state’s health department to “establish an annual rate schedule that shall be no greater than one hundred fifty percent of the statewide average wage paid in the most recently preceding cost report year by a specific type of health care entity to a nursing services professional, within a specific nursing services professional category.”

Industry representatives led by Iowa lobbyists Bill Dix and Logan Shine; former ASA chair Bob Livonius; and Steve Heeg, chief executive officer of ASA member company Grape Tree Medical Services met with the bill’s sponsor, House Speaker Pat Grassley (R-New Hartford), to express their concerns with the legislation as written.

Although the House passed the bill, when it moved to the Senate, the group intensified its advocacy with key lawmakers. They explained the problems a rate cap system posed to the state’s long-term care community and urged lawmakers to address the nursing shortage instead of imposing rate caps that will exacerbate the shortage and harm patient care.

Yesterday, that hard work paid off when the workforce committee of the Iowa Senate failed to advance the bill to the Senate floor. Although it is possible the rate cap language could be included in another bill, HF 2391 is dead—thanks in large part to the Iowa group that led the opposition effort and to all the health care staffing firms that weighed in with the Senate workforce committee.

Prior to the ASA Staffing Law & Compliance Conference, ASA will host a special compliance preconference program called “Health Care Staffing: Legal and Legislative Updates,” which takes place Wednesday, May 15, 1–5 p.m. at the Westin Washington, DC, Downtown. Separate registration is required, and to register for the preconference program you must register for the Staffing Law & Compliance Conference, which begins at the same location the next day. Early registration rates are available now, but rates will increase after tomorrow. Visit staffinglawconference.net to register for both events.

In Congress, Rep. Lloyd Smucker (PA-11) has introduced HR 6833, the Improve and Enhance the Work Opportunity Tax Credit Act. The bill, which would update the WOTC for the first time since 1996, has bipartisan support and has been referred to the House Ways and Means Committee.

As currently drafted, the bill would increase the current credit percentage from 40% to 50% of qualified wages and add a second level of credit for employees who work 400 or more hours in their first year of employment. In addition, the bill eliminates the age cap at which people who receive benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program are eligible for WOTC. This change will provide an incentive for employers to hire workers older than 40.

The WOTC provides federal tax credits to employers that invest in American workers who have consistently faced barriers to employment, including eligible veterans, SNAP recipients, individuals with disabilities, and long-term unemployed individuals. The National Employment Opportunity Network reports that the WOTC has saved federal and state governments an estimated $20.2 billion in entitlement spending over 10 years.

ASA is part of a coalition of trade associations urging Congress to pass HR 6833 and has signed on to this letter of support.

This is the final installment in the series recapping the association’s efforts in 2023 to defeat or significantly mitigate proposed legislation that would have harmed the staffing industry.
Shortly after the Kansas legislature convened its 2023 legislative session, HB 2265—legislation aimed at regulating supplemental nursing services agencies—was introduced. This marks the second consecutive year that such legislation was introduced in the state.

The bill would have required supplemental nursing services agencies to register annually with the state’s department of health. It also prohibited the use of conversion fees and noncompete agreements. Finally, HB 2265 would have required supplemental nursing services agencies to file quarterly reports that would have included a detailed list of the average amount charged and paid for each individual agency worker by category.

ASA lobbyist Jason Watkins, with Watkins Public Strategies LLC, set up several meetings with state legislative committee members and with the bill’s supporters to reiterate the staffing industry’s concerns. The bill failed to advance out of committee, but several attempts were made to attach it to other bills. ASA stayed engaged throughout the process and kept the bill from advancing in any form.

Through the remainder of the year in this space, ASA will recap the association’s efforts in successfully defeating or significantly mitigating proposed legislation that would have harmed the staffing industry.
Earlier this year, the Illinois legislature passed, and Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law, HB 2862, legislation that amends the Illinois Day and Temporary Labor Services Act. Advocacy efforts led by ASA; the Illinois Search and Staffing Association, an ASA-affiliated chapter; and ASA lobbyist Paul Rosenfeld of the Government Navigation Group were instrumental in mitigating the law’s burden on temporary staffing companies.

After several months of hearings and negotiations, leaders of the Illinois General Assembly made clear that the bill—including the requirement that certain temporary employees receive the same pay and benefits as equivalent direct hire employees after working for more than 90 calendar days for a client—was going to pass. Rep. Jay Hoffman (D-Belleville), the assistant majority leader of the Illinois House of Representatives, asked if there were any amendments that the industry would like to request, ASA submitted these suggested changes, which were adopted by the legislature:

• Removal of the requirement to collect race and ethnicity data on every applicant
• Removal of the requirement to disclose to employees the hourly bill rate charged to clients
• Increase in the waiting period to comply with the pay and benefits mandate from 60 days to 90 days

The law and amendments do not apply to temporary professional or clerical workers.

In August, the Illinois Department of Labor published proposed rules to implement HB 2862. ASA submitted a comment letter that suggested, among other things, that temporary labor agencies should have the option to calculate the 90-day waiting period based on their existing payroll systems and practices, that the equal pay mandate should apply only if the comparative direct hire job is “substantially similar,” and that the proposed safety training requirements should clarify that clients should conduct site-specific training.

Negotiations on a Technical Fix Amendment Lead to Delay in Equal Pay and Cost of Benefits Mandate
During a recent special legislative session, proponents and opponents of HB 2862 discussed possible technical corrections to the bill. The discussions ended without agreement. However, in early November, HB 3641 was enacted delaying implementation of the equal pay and benefits mandate. The law provides that calculation of the 90-day waiting period will not begin until April 1, 2024.

The delay bill was passed at the urging of ASA, the Illinois Search and Staffing Association, and the Staffing Services Association of Illinois. Industry representatives met with Rep. Hoffman, who was instrumental in achieving the delay.

The delay in implementing the equal pay and benefits mandate will give the Illinois Department of Labor time to draft regulations clarifying how the mandate will apply. State legislators had sharply criticized the department’s proposed rules, saying they were “too vague to provide meaningful guidance.”

ASA filed extensive comments on the proposed regulations and will continue to pursue legislative fixes when the legislature reconvenes in January.

Through the remainder of the year in this space, ASA will recap the association’s efforts in successfully defeating or significantly mitigating proposed legislation that would have harmed the staffing industry.
Earlier this year, advocacy efforts led by ASA; California Staffing Professionals, an ASA-affiliated chapter; and California lobbyists Mike Robson and Bridget McGowan of Edelstein Gilbert Robson & Smith LLC were instrumental in derailing two California bills that would have had a major negative impact on the staffing industry.

The first bill, AB 331, would establish various requirements for the use of automated decision tools (ADTs), including in the employment context. Among other things, it would require that developers and users of ADTs prepare yearly impact statements addressing the use and validity of the ADTs, prepare governance programs to manage the risk of algorithmic discrimination, notify all persons subject to a consequential decision made by an ADT, and provide an alternative selection process for individuals who choose not to be subject to ADT evaluation.

The second bill, SB 809, would eliminate an employer’s ability to consider an applicant’s conviction history save for a few very narrow exceptions, such as for jobs in industries the government deems sensitive in nature. Companies permitted to consider conviction history would be barred from taking adverse action against an applicant due to a delay in obtaining the applicant’s conviction history, even where that delay was outside of the company’s control.

The staffing industry worked with the California Chamber of Commerce to oppose the bills or suggest amendments to them. Amendments to AB 331 proposed by ASA would, among other things, limit when candidates may opt out of ADT evaluation, thereby ensuring that staffing firms could continue to place candidates in jobs in a timely manner. ASA joined a coalition of employer groups in opposing SB 809 on the basis that it would prohibit staffing firms from conducting criminal background checks for most jobs, even when clients require them.

Following weeks of discussions and negotiations, both AB 331 and SB 809 were moved to the inactive file, meaning they will not be taken up this year. Both bills can be reconsidered during the 2024 legislative session, and ASA will re-engage if necessary.

Through the remainder of the year in this space, ASA will recap the association’s efforts in successfully defeating or significantly mitigating proposed legislation that would have harmed the staffing industry.
Earlier this year, the Delaware House of Representatives introduced HB 199, a bill aimed at regulating temporary nurse staffing agencies. Among the provisions of the bill was language authorizing the state’s health department to “establish a maximum rate temporary nurse staffing agencies can charge long-term facilities.”

Working with Delaware lobbyist Ellen Valentino of the Cornerstone Government Affairs Group, ASA met with the bill’s sponsors and House and Senate leadership to express the industry’s concerns with the legislation as written. They discussed the potential problems a rate cap system posed to the state’s long-term care community and urged the legislature to take steps to address the nursing shortage instead of installing rate caps that will just exacerbate the nursing shortage and harm patient care.

When the legislature adjourned for the year at the end of June, no action had taken place on HB 199. Because legislation carries over to the second year of the legislative session, the bill is still active. ASA lobbyists are in the process of scheduling meetings with the bill’s sponsors to see what the future may hold for HB 199 and any other bill affecting temporary nurse staffing.