Workforce development: High road training partnerships: scoring preference.

Header changed from amendment tracking (multiple amendment dates) to final enrolled format showing passage by the Assembly on August 20, 2026 and by the Senate on August 19, 2026.

Removed the standard vote/appropriation/fiscal committee/state-mandated local program line that appears in amended versions but is dropped in enrolled bills.

Added the Governor's approval signature block at the end of the bill, which is standard for enrolled bills ready for executive action.

Removed Section 1 which required applicants to have a collective bargaining agreement or labor-management partnership, prioritize incumbent workers in low- and middle-wage sectors, invest in sectors with documented industry demand, and give priority to sectors tackling pressing needs such as 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games readiness. Also removed a fallback provision requiring grantors to maintain a scoring preference if CBAs could not be required.

Expanded who can receive the scoring preference: an entity applying 'on behalf of, or in partnership with' a bona fide labor-management cooperation committee now qualifies, whereas the Assembly version only covered entities applying 'on behalf of' such a committee.

Broadened the definition of 'bona fide labor-management cooperation committee' from entities established solely under the federal Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978 to also include those established pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement or memorandum of understanding.

New section added requiring the California Workforce Development Board to provide a scoring preference to applicants that are bona fide labor-management cooperation committees (as defined under the federal Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978) or entities applying on their behalf with written authorization, when awarding grants for high road training partnership programs.

Requires the board to determine the amount of the scoring preference and incorporate it into program guidelines and grant solicitations.

Defines 'bona fide labor-management cooperation committee' as an entity established under the federal Labor Management Cooperation Act of 1978, jointly established and administered by one or more employers and one or more labor organizations for purposes including improving labor-management relations, workforce training, job security, and involving workers in decisions affecting their jobs.

Adds a savings clause stating the scoring preference does not require the board to award a grant solely on the basis of that preference.

Removes the amendment to Section 14010 of the Unemployment Insurance Code, which was described in the prior version as a nonsubstantive change to the description of the California Workforce Development Board's role.

Fiscal committee review changed from 'no' to 'yes,' indicating the bill now requires fiscal analysis due to the new scoring preference mechanism affecting grant allocation.

New Section 14013.5 requires applicants for high road training partnership funding to have a collective bargaining agreement or labor-management partnership as a condition of eligibility.

Applicants must prioritize incumbent workers in low- and middle-wage sectors and job seekers entering those industries.

Applicants must invest in sectors with documented industry demand and established job quality standards.

Applicants must give priority to low- and middle-wage sectors addressing pressing needs, explicitly citing readiness for the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games as an example.

A fallback provision requires that if a collective bargaining agreement cannot be made a strict requirement, grantors must still maintain a scoring preference or favorable criteria for applicants with one.

The bill's scope expanded from a nonsubstantive wording change to Section 14010 (changing 'California's' to 'the state's') to a substantive new funding eligibility framework under a new code section.

Fiscal committee review changed from 'no' to 'yes', indicating the amendment introduces fiscal implications requiring committee analysis.