Plan to Stop Staff Confronting Shoplifters Dropped From Bill Ahead of Vote

A workplace safety bill, which originally aimed to stop employers requiring workers to tackle shoplifters, is headed for a decisive vote after the controversial plan was dropped.

Senate Bill 553, passed by the state's upper house in June, had proposed a ban on employers requiring non-security employees to confront "active shooters or suspected shoplifters," sparking local protests from some business owners.

Jaskaran Sahota, who led protests outside the state Capitol on August 16, argued the original bill would lead to spiraling costs for small businesses.

"Eventually what will happen if you start losing money, you're going to shut it [your business] down," he told The Sacramento Bee that day. "Unemployment will go up, there will be no jobs at small businesses and it's going to effect our community."

The bill was amended two weeks later to remove all language related to shoplifters.

Democratic State Senator Dave Cortese, who sponsored the original bill, told Newsweek that this had been done "as a concession" to the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal OSHA) "and by extension, the governor."

He said SB 553 "expedited" general industry standards that the state safety body had worked up over a course of six years and which "does not have language specific to any industry, such as retail shoplifting."

"While the retail industry is still covered by SB 553, retail shoplifting is no longer called out by SB 553," Cortese added.

Under the bill, employers whose workers face "a credible threat of violence" must provide effective violence prevention training and maintain a violence incident log. The plans will have to ensure "that employees comply with safe and healthy work practices, which may include disciplinary action."

However, Cortese stressed that the bill "does not now, and never did in any prior form, legislate disciplinary actions by employers. Employee discipline issues are regulated by other statutes in existing state law."

SB 553 would also allow employers to seek temporary restraining orders against violent individuals for their premises and, from January 2025, would allow unions to also seek a restraining order on an employee's behalf without them being named in the complaint.

The bill was scheduled for a third reading in the State Assembly on Wednesday, before heading for a full vote. If passed, and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, it would become law on July 1 next year.

Provisions for protecting healthcare employees from violence are already on the statute books in California, but SB 553 would broaden these protections out to nearly all customer-facing workplaces.

Newsweek approached the Speaker's Office of the California State Assembly via phone for comment on Wednesday.

State Senator Cortese said on Friday that the motivation for the change to the law code came from the mass shooting at the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority in May 2021, which left nine rail workers dead.

"I visited the crime scene that day, met with victim's families, and swore I would do everything in my power to help workers prepare for outbreaks of senseless violence," he wrote in a statement.

SB 553 overcame a key hurdle earlier this week, after the California Chamber of Commerce withdrew its opposition following the inclusion of amendments that exempt businesses with fewer than 10 employees. It now has a neutral stance towards the bill.

According to local news outlet KQED, the measure comes amid a rise in violence towards workers in the state—particularly at retail premises. It noted one case, from 2021, in which a Rite Aid shop worker was fatally shot after confronting a shoplifter.

The increase in violent incidents in California is part of a wider trend of retail crime becoming more prevalent, more organized and more detrimental to retailers and consumers alike.

Experts have said that, in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, the increase in online shopping has spurred organized criminal gangs chasing higher profit margins to steal in greater volume, often targeting high-value items. Organized retail crime is thought to be costing the American retail sector billions of dollars a year.

San Francisco has been a hotspot for shoplifting of late, leading to an exodus of big name brands from the area. In 2021, Walgreens shut five shops in the city, citing intolerable retail crime, and has since been followed by Whole Foods in April and Nordstrom in May.

That same month, a Lululemon store in Georgia made headlines after footage of staff confronting a group of three young men attempting to rob the store of bundles of clothing emerged. Two of the workers were later fired by the company over the incident.

While the workers' dismissal sparked outrage, many retailers discourage staff from becoming physically involved with shoplifters over fears about their safety. At the time, a Lululemon spokesperson cited the safety of workers and customers in its decision, stating that the company had "an absolute zero-tolerance policy for our employees engaging with guests in a way that could put themselves, or others, in harm's way."

Update: 09/06/2023 2:03 p.m. ET: The headline has been updated.

Update: 09/07/2023 9:10 a.m. ET: This story has been updated with further information. The headline was also changed.

Update: 09/20/2023 3:12 a.m. ET: This story was updated with comment from California state Senator Dave Cortese.