Request for veto

PUT ON LETTERHEAD

INSERT DATE

The Honorable Edmund G. Brown, Jr.

Governor, State of California

State Capitol

Sacramento, California 95814
SUBJECT: AB 211 (CEDILLO)--SUPPLEMENTAL JOB DISPLACEMENT

VOUCHER – REQUEST FOR VETO
Dear Governor Brown:
INSERT ORGANIZATION NAME respectfully requests a VETO of AB 211 (Cedillo), which is on your desk awaiting action, which makes substantive changes to the Supplemental Job Displacement Voucher (SJDV) benefit provided to injured workers who cannot return to work at the same place of employment where they were injured.
We support making the SJDV benefit administration work better for both injured workers and employers. However, AB 211 falls short of those goals. We believe that AB 211 should be vetoed due to the drafting errors in the bill, creation of new administrative burdens and likely cost increases associated with the bill.
Over the past few years, public and private sector employers have attempted to resolve problems with the bill language with the author and sponsor of this legislation. However, all efforts to construct a bill that achieves the sponsor’s goals without creating new problems for employers failed to produce agreement.
It is important to note that has never been a problem with how the benefit can be used. Instead, our concern has been with how and when the benefit is delivered. Creating two separate benefits with two separate standards for use simply adds to the administrative headaches in delivering the benefit to the injured worker. This adds unnecessary expense to the system.
If AB 211 is enacted, public and private sector employers expect to see a substantial increase in the number of injured workers who take full advantage of their vouchers. Unfortunately, the exact amount of the cost increase, both for the state and other public employers, is impossible to predict with data is currently available.
We strongly believe that AB 211 should be vetoed due to the drafting errors in the bill, creation of new administrative burdens and likely cost increases associated with the bill.
For these reasons, we must urge a VETO of AB 211 (Cedillo) when it comes before you for action.
Sincerely,