CA AB 1340
enactedTransportation network company drivers: labor relations.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1340 pass?
Yes. CA AB 1340 has been enacted into law as of 2025-10-03. Latest recorded action (2025-10-03): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 335, Statutes of 2025.
What is CA AB 1340 about?
Existing law declares the public policy of the state regarding labor organization, including, among other things, that it is necessary for a worker to have full freedom of association, self-organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, to negotiate the terms and conditions of their employment, and to be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Existing law, the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act, added by Proposition 22, as approved by the voters at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election (the initiative) , categorizes app-based drivers for network companies, as defined, as independent contractors if certain conditions are met. Existing law requires, among other things, that the network company provide a health care subsidy to qualifying app-based drivers, provide a minimum level of compensation for app-based drivers, and not restrict app-based drivers from working in any other lawful occupation or business. Existing case law holds that specified provisions of the initiative are invalid on separation of powers grounds; however, the court severed the unconstitutional provisions, allowing the rest of the initiative to remain in effect. Existing law also establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (board) in state government as a means of resolving disputes and enforcing the statutory duties and rights of specified public employers and employees under various acts regulating collective bargaining. Existing law vests the board with jurisdiction to enforce certain provisions over charges of unfair practices for represented employees. This bill, the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act (act) , would establish that transportation network company (TNC) drivers have the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of TNC driver organizations, to bargain through representatives of their own choosing, to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and to refrain from such activities. The bill would require the board to enforce these provisions. This bill would require all TNCs to submit certain information every quarter, including information identifying and related personal work information about TNC drivers to the board in a list format, as prescribed. The bill would establish various procedures governing the certification and decertification of TNC driver organizations for purposes of representing drivers in the collective bargaining process. In this connection, the bill would require the board to determine if an entity is a TNC driver organization, as prescribed, and make certain determinations as to whether a specific organization has been designated as the bargaining representative for TNC drivers pursuant to an election process. The bill would establish various notice requirements, conditions, and timelines governing the representation of TNC drivers. The bill would, among other things, require TNCs and certified driver bargaining organizations to negotiate in good faith pursuant to the act, as described, and would set forth procedures for mediation and arbitration for purposes of reaching a sectoral agreement. The bill would set forth procedures and guidelines for the board to approve or disapprove sectoral agreements. The bill would require a TNC that was not a covered TNC when a sectoral agreement took effect but subsequently became a covered TNC to be bound by all terms of the sectoral agreement, as specified. This bill would make it an unfair practice for a TNC, an agent of a TNC, or a multicompany committee, as defined, to fail or refuse to negotiate in good faith with a certified driver bargaining organization, among other things. The bill would also make it an unfair practice for a certified driver bargaining organization or its agents to fail to negotiate in good faith with a TNC or multicompany committee, among other things. The bill would set forth unfair practice charge procedures and remedies for those practices. The bill would define terms for purposes of the act, make the provisions of the act severable, and make related legislative policy statements. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, generally requires all meetings of a state body to be open and public. This bill would exempt any meeting of a mediator or arbitrator with any party or group to the negotiations process and the mediation and arbitration processes in the act from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting act. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. This bill would exclude from public disclosure information regarding TNC drivers that is submitted to the board pursuant to the act, except as specified. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
Who sponsors CA AB 1340?
Wicks is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1340, joined by 8 cosponsors.
Description
Existing law declares the public policy of the state regarding labor organization, including, among other things, that it is necessary for a worker to have full freedom of association, self-organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, to negotiate the terms and conditions of their employment, and to be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Existing law, the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act, added by Proposition 22, as approved by the voters at the November 3, 2020, statewide general election (the initiative) , categorizes app-based drivers for network companies, as defined, as independent contractors if certain conditions are met. Existing law requires, among other things, that the network company provide a health care subsidy to qualifying app-based drivers, provide a minimum level of compensation for app-based drivers, and not restrict app-based drivers from working in any other lawful occupation or business. Existing case law holds that specified provisions of the initiative are invalid on separation of powers grounds; however, the court severed the unconstitutional provisions, allowing the rest of the initiative to remain in effect. Existing law also establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (board) in state government as a means of resolving disputes and enforcing the statutory duties and rights of specified public employers and employees under various acts regulating collective bargaining. Existing law vests the board with jurisdiction to enforce certain provisions over charges of unfair practices for represented employees. This bill, the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act (act) , would establish that transportation network company (TNC) drivers have the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of TNC driver organizations, to bargain through representatives of their own choosing, to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and to refrain from such activities. The bill would require the board to enforce these provisions. This bill would require all TNCs to submit certain information every quarter, including information identifying and related personal work information about TNC drivers to the board in a list format, as prescribed. The bill would establish various procedures governing the certification and decertification of TNC driver organizations for purposes of representing drivers in the collective bargaining process. In this connection, the bill would require the board to determine if an entity is a TNC driver organization, as prescribed, and make certain determinations as to whether a specific organization has been designated as the bargaining representative for TNC drivers pursuant to an election process. The bill would establish various notice requirements, conditions, and timelines governing the representation of TNC drivers. The bill would, among other things, require TNCs and certified driver bargaining organizations to negotiate in good faith pursuant to the act, as described, and would set forth procedures for mediation and arbitration for purposes of reaching a sectoral agreement. The bill would set forth procedures and guidelines for the board to approve or disapprove sectoral agreements. The bill would require a TNC that was not a covered TNC when a sectoral agreement took effect but subsequently became a covered TNC to be bound by all terms of the sectoral agreement, as specified. This bill would make it an unfair practice for a TNC, an agent of a TNC, or a multicompany committee, as defined, to fail or refuse to negotiate in good faith with a certified driver bargaining organization, among other things. The bill would also make it an unfair practice for a certified driver bargaining organization or its agents to fail to negotiate in good faith with a TNC or multicompany committee, among other things. The bill would set forth unfair practice charge procedures and remedies for those practices. The bill would define terms for purposes of the act, make the provisions of the act severable, and make related legislative policy statements. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, generally requires all meetings of a state body to be open and public. This bill would exempt any meeting of a mediator or arbitrator with any party or group to the negotiations process and the mediation and arbitration processes in the act from the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting act. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. This bill would exclude from public disclosure information regarding TNC drivers that is submitted to the board pursuant to the act, except as specified. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
- Introduced
- 2025-02-21
- Latest action
- 2025-10-03 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 335, Statutes of 2025.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Wicksauthor
- Bermanauthor
- Bryancoauthor
- Elhawarycoauthor
- Mark Gonzálezcoauthor
- Kalracoauthor
- Leecoauthor
- McKinnorcoauthor
- Pérezcoauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
2025-02-21
Introduced. To print.
introduction
2025-02-22
From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.
2025-02-24
Read first time.
reading-1
2025-03-13
Referred to Com. on TRANS.
referral-committee
2025-04-08
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. Read second time and amended.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-04-09
Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
referral-committee
2025-04-10
Re-referred to Com. on L. & E. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.
referral-committee
2025-04-24
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-05-07
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-05-27
Assembly Rule 63 suspended. (Ayes 51. Noes 16. Page 1644.)
2025-05-27
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2025-05-27
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 3.) (May 23).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage
2025-05-28
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-06-04
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 54. Noes 15. Page 2081.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-06-05
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2025-06-18
Referred to Coms. on L., P.E. & R. and TRANS.
referral-committee
2025-06-19
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2025-06-25
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on TRANS. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on TRANS.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-07-09
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 4.) (July 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2025-08-18
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
referral-committee
2025-08-29
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-08-29
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 29).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-02
Re-referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b).
referral-committee
2025-09-02
(Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 2402.)
2025-09-02
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2025-09-02
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(b).
referral-committee
2025-09-03
From committee: That the measure be returned to Senate Floor for consideration. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (September 3)
committee-passage
2025-09-08
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 10. Page 2594.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2025-09-08
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2025-09-09
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 60. Noes 15. Page 3095.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2025-09-09
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
executive-receipt
2025-10-03
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2025-10-03
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 335, Statutes of 2025.
became-law
Versions
- 02/21/25 - Introduced — 2025-02-21Compare
- 04/08/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-04-08Compare
- 05/27/25 - Amended Assembly — 2025-05-27Compare
- 06/19/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-06-19Compare
- 09/02/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-09-02Compare
- 09/09/25 - Enrolled — 2025-09-09Compare
- 10/03/25 - Chaptered — 2025-10-03Compare
- AB1340Compare
- (document, no version)Compare
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-04-23 · pass · 5-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Lee: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Ward: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Flora: other
- Chen: other
Do pass as amended.
2025-05-23 · pass · 11-3
Member-level votes (15)
- Calderon: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Hart: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Solache: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Ta: no
- Dixon: no
- Tangipa: no
- Sanchez: other
AB 1340 Wicks Assembly Third Reading
2025-06-04 · pass · 54-15
Member-level votes (79)
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Krell: yes
- Ward: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Berman: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Haney: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Fong: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Bains: yes
- Soria: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Hart: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Papan: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Lee: yes
- Patel: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Solache: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- DeMaio: no
- Macedo: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Dixon: no
- Alanis: no
- Patterson: no
- Ta: no
- Sanchez: no
- Gallagher: no
- Ellis: no
- Hadwick: no
- Tangipa: no
- Wallis: no
- Hoover: no
- Davies: no
- Lackey: other
- Michelle Rodriguez: other
- Flora: other
- Nguyen: other
- Carrillo: other
- Ramos: other
- Chen: other
- Castillo: other
- Blanca Rubio: other
- Pacheco: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Transportation]
2025-06-25 · pass · 4-1
Member-level votes (5)
- Cortese: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Laird: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Strickland: no
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2025-07-08 · pass · 11-4
Member-level votes (15)
- Arreguín: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Limón: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Seyarto: no
- Valladares: no
- Strickland: no
- Dahle: no
Placed on suspense file
2025-08-18 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Grayson: yes
Do pass
2025-08-29 · pass · 5-2
Member-level votes (7)
- Richardson: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Dahle: no
- Seyarto: no
That the measure be returned to Senate Floor for consideration. Ordered to third reading.
2025-09-03 · pass · 4-1
Member-level votes (5)
- Laird: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Strickland: no
3rd Reading AB1340 Wicks et al. By Cortese
2025-09-08 · pass · 29-10
Member-level votes (40)
- Wahab: yes
- Laird: yes
- Rubio: yes
- McGuire: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Limón: yes
- McNerney: yes
- Wiener: yes
- Padilla: yes
- Umberg: yes
- Hurtado: yes
- Blakespear: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Cervantes: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Ashby: yes
- Durazo: yes
- Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
- Allen: yes
- Arreguín: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Archuleta: yes
- Caballero: yes
- Gonzalez: yes
- Becker: yes
- Niello: no
- Jones: no
- Alvarado-Gil: no
- Choi: no
- Seyarto: no
- Strickland: no
- Ochoa Bogh: no
- Grove: no
- Dahle: no
- Valladares: no
- Stern: other
AB 1340 Wicks Concurrence in Senate Amendments
2025-09-09 · pass · 60-15
Member-level votes (80)
- Ahrens: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Quirk-Silva: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Addis: yes
- Ward: yes
- Haney: yes
- Hart: yes
- Fong: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Bains: yes
- Ransom: yes
- Soria: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Berman: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Celeste Rodriguez: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Papan: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Lee: yes
- Stefani: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Solache: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Zbur: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Krell: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Patel: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Johnson: no
- Dixon: no
- Hoover: no
- Hadwick: no
- Macedo: no
- Alanis: no
- Gallagher: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Sanchez: no
- Ta: no
- Ellis: no
- Davies: no
- Wallis: no
- Patterson: no
- DeMaio: no
- Tangipa: other
- Lackey: other
- Chen: other
- Castillo: other
- Flora: other
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 1340. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.