Mason Contractors Association of California, Inc.

Background In December 2012 and January 2013, the federal agencies issued important new guidance to shape the affordability provision of next year’s looming employer health coverage mandate. Under those rules, an employer subject to health care reform must offer “affordable” coverage of a minimum value plan to employees. Technically, that means the employee’s share of the self-only premium for the lowest cost coverage cannot exceed 9.5 percent of the employee’s household income.

An employer will not know household income and should not ask for verification of that information. (A variety of state and federal laws arguably protect the employee from having to share such sensitive information.) Employers have been asking how they must comply, given what they cannot know. In response, the IRS initially announced a safe harbor based on an estimate of the employee’s annual W-2 income. That particular safe harbor, as clarified below, is still allowed -- plus two new safe...

It’s time to ring in the New Year with a review of California’s new employment laws which went into effect January 1, 2013:

Social Media: AB 1844 prohibits California employers from requiring or requesting employees or job applicants to disclose usernames or passwords to enable the employer to access their personal social media, to access their personal social media in front of an employer representative, or to divulge their social media. “Social media” is defined to include Facebook and Twitter pages, as well as personal e-mail and text messages. Employers may require employees to disclose passwords or usernames if necessary to access an employer-provided electronic device or if relevant to an investigation of employee misconduct or legal violations.

Personnel Records: AB 2674 expands existing law which allows employees to inspect their personnel records to now require employers to provide current or former employees with copies of their personnel records...

CORE TESTING REQUIREMENTS

Certain DSA and all OSHPD projects require masonry walls to be cored and the cores will be tested to determine the bond between the grout and masonry unit. The required shear bond depends on the masonry strength, and is about 100 psi for walls with an f’m of 1,500 psi.

There are several recommended steps for best practices in grouting masonry in anticipation of coring and core testing.

1. Determine if coring of masonry walls is required.
Technically, coring of single-wythe hollow unit masonry walls prior to the 2010 edition of the California Building Code is required, but there is no requirement for a shear bond between the grout and masonry unit. Know which code the job references, and use it.

2. Use a grout mix design suitable for masonry.
A concrete mix design and grout mix design are not the same. Concrete suppliers typically use admixtures as water replacement to improve a concrete mix, but these...

New Laws for 2013 that Affect Contractors
“Courtesy of American Subcontractors Association of California (ASAC)”

Over 4,000 were introduced by the California Legislature in 2011-2012. Below are summaries of some of the more important bills affecting contractors in their roles as contractors. Many other bills will impact them in other roles, such as being businesses, taxpayers, and employers. Each of the summaries are brief, focusing on the gist of the bill, while most of the bills have additional provisions that are not mentioned. Links are provided to the full text of each of the bills for those wanting to know in detail the provisions of the new law. Lastly, reference is made to failed bills that are likely to be revisited next session.

Indemnity Reform

SB 474 (Evans D) Type 1 indemnity outlawed in California. Supported by ASAC.
To make construction businesses responsible for losses they cause on commercial construction projects, the...

By Sam K. Abdulaziz &
Kenneth S. Grossbart
Abdulaziz, Grossbart & Rudman

When you bid on a job you need to understand what work is involved, what materials you will use, and what subcontractors or material suppliers you will be using. But do you understand the rest of the contract? In the Greg Opinski Construction, Inc. v. City of Oakdale case, it is seen why it is important to have a complete understanding of what is in your contract. This matter went to trial for various other issues, but the issue at hand in the appeal is all that is discussed for purposes of this article.

This particular case came about because of seven months of job delays, unapproved change orders, construction defects and non-payment. The contract called for the job to be completed within 300 days. It laid out very specific change order procedures for which either the contract time or price could be changed. There were two acceptable avenues to have a change order accepted....