Starting 2020 NO MORE LOCUMS IN CALIFORNIA

babyNP., APRN · Sep 16, 2019

But why? I don’t understand the benefit

guest416560 · Sep 16, 2019

The bill was designed to help low paying contractors obtain benefits ie Uber and Lyft drivers. The trickle down effect is going to obliterate the ability of NPs PAs and RNs to be do locums in the State of California. My locum agency stated that we will all have to be employees of the agency and as such our hourly rate will go down. No thanks. It's time to leave California.

babyNP., APRN · Sep 17, 2019

can you speak to the tax benefits of being an independent contractor?

I know with a 1099 you have to pay employee + employer share of medicare/medicaid/SS which is like 15.2% whereas if you're a w2 you only pay half of that.

Do the wages pay you more than the 7.6% extra you would need to counter balance that?

honeykrown, MSN, NP · Sep 17, 2019

How does it affect jobs with union. In the past, I have known that when Union nurses threaten a strike, the companies are forced to use Locum providers.

Also are they just saying independent contractor or does that affect nurses or NPs who are given W2's by their agencies. I dont leave in CA and not sure how this can trickle down to other states.

Where were the nurses , NP's and their unions when this was being discussed?

guest416560 · Sep 17, 2019

The California Association of Nurses apparently was for this bill. I'm against it. There will no longer be locum providers during strikes. This law prevents it. If you are a RN, NP or PA you will be an employee of the hospital if only a temporary employee. I really don't know how they will do this during a strike. This is why I think the CAN was in favor.

If you are given a 1099 you are a contractor. If you are given a W2 you are an employee.

In general, locum providers are given at least a 30% bump in hourly pay compared to a salaried employee. As a locum you can write off many expenses that you can't as an employee. The State of CA has eliminated the locums/independent contractor position as of 1-2020 unless you were in one of the protected groups which included medical doctors and dentists. I have no idea what the CANP views were on this legislation.

If you live in a blue leaning state I would suspect this type of legislation might trickle down to you.

Advanced Practice Columnist / Guide · Sep 17, 2019

Interesting, definitely an example of a law meant to protect a segment of the workforce but ended up limiting the prospects for another group. So I wonder what other groups are saying...there are professional business consultants, lawyers, etc who are independent contractors, does the law affect them too? And why didn't the CANP make some noise about it?

ETA: sorry, read some info and the law exempts doctors, dentists, psychologists, insurance agents, stockbrokers, lawyers, accountants, engineers, and real estate agents. Still wondering why NP's, PA's, CRNA's didn't raise a stink.

guest416560 · Sep 17, 2019

Either the State NP PA and CRNA organizations were in favor of this legislation or somebody dropped the ball. I'm waiting to see what happens January 1. I suspect you will see quite a few ORs empty with no CRNAs available to pass gas and quite a few hospitals without nurses and clinics without NPs/PAs. This will be a disaster for healthcare in California especially in underserved rural parts of the state.

I went to the CANP website and apparently the powers that be supported this legislation. Don't ask me why. This is just another reason I'm not a member of the association any longer.

AB 5Gonzalez D Worker status: employees and independent contractors.

Current Text: Enrolled: 9/16/2019 html pdf

Status: 9/11/2019-Assembly Rule 77 suspended. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling.

Location: 9/11/2019-A. ENROLLMENT

Summary: Would state the intent of the Legislature to codify the decision in the Dynamex case and clarify its application. The bill would provide that for purposes of the provisions of the Labor Code, the Unemployment Insurance Code, and the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business.

PositionPrioritySubject

Support If Amended on Coalition Letter

guest416560 · Sep 18, 2019

The CANP responded to me as to why they supported this legislation but it was mostly political speak:

Their response:

CANP has actually been engaged in a coalition that has expressed concerns about the bill. While the coalition was unable to secure an exemption for health care professionals who work as independent contractors, CANP's advocacy team will continue to be actively engaged in conversations that will continue through the fall and into 2020 regarding industries that are negatively impacted by the bill.

My response:

That's great that the organization is having conversations but my question as to why the CANP supported any part of AB 5 puzzles me as a NP who works exclusively as an independent contractor.

I will respond when they do.

guest769224 · Sep 18, 2019

Does this effect travel nurses on assignments to California?

FullGlass, BSN, MSN, NP · Sep 18, 2019

It will be interesting how this affects the locums agencies. The key advantage to locums is better pay, and if the agencies cut pay, I'm not sure how they will recruit NPs.

Advanced Practice Columnist / Guide · Sep 18, 2019

1 hour ago, ICUman said:
Does this effect travel nurses on assignments to California?

It shouldn't. Travel nurses from my understanding are employed by the staffing agency.