Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workplace Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate labor committee backs bill to preserve workers' right to wear face coverings
Summary
AB 596 would allow employees to wear face coverings at work unless doing so creates a clear safety hazard; committee approved the bill and sent it to appropriations after testimony from unions and limited opposition calling for narrow regulatory language alignment.
The California State Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment and Retirement passed AB 596 to the Committee on Appropriations. The bill would protect an employee's right to wear a face covering or respirator at work unless the employer can show the covering "creates a clear safety hazard." Supporters said the measure restores a portion of COVID-era Cal/OSHA protections that expired in February 2025.
Assemblymember McKenna, the bill's author, said AB 596 "simply restores this important protection" and noted amendments to allow employers to require momentary removal of coverings for identification when doing so does not present a safety hazard. McKenna said the measure "does not impose new cost or mandates on employers" and is intended to balance individual health protections with workplace safety.
Labor and health organizations testified in support. Tim Steed of the Orange County Employees Association, representing thousands of public employees, told the committee the bill would allow workers who are immunocompromised or caring for vulnerable household members to protect themselves. Elmer Lazarda of the California Federation of Labor Unions described the measure as important for protection from respiratory illness and wildfire smoke exposure.
Opposition was narrow and technical. Robert Moutre of the California Chamber of Commerce said the group supports the idea but urged the bill mirror the limited exception previously in Cal/OSHA emergency regulations — an exception that permitted removal of a mask during specific tasks that could not feasibly be performed while masked and only for the duration of those tasks. Other opponents raised concerns about customer perceptions and workplace impacts.
Committee members asked whether the language tracks the prior Cal/OSHA regulation; the author's office said it planned clarifying amendments to address identification and task‑specific exceptions. Several members expressed support for the bill as written pending technical adjustments.
Action: The committee recorded aye votes from Senators Smallwood Cuevas, Strickland, Durazo, Laird and Cortese and passed AB 596 to the Committee on Appropriations (5–0).
Why it matters: Supporters said the bill preserves worker choice to protect their health from viruses and wildfire smoke; opponents asked the committee to preserve narrowly tailored, task‑limited exceptions that were in previous Cal/OSHA emergency rules.
What remains: The author and stakeholders plan technical amendments to clarify limited exceptions for specific tasks and identification procedures.
