濮阳东方医院男科非常好濮阳东方男科医院技术非常专业,濮阳东方妇科评价高吗,濮阳东方医院男科可靠,濮阳东方医院治阳痿价格,濮阳东方医院治阳痿收费很低,濮阳东方收费便宜吗,濮阳东方医院割包皮手术

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers sent the governor a bill Wednesday that would give new wage and benefit protections to workers at so-called gig economy companies such as Uber and Lyft where people pick up jobs on their own schedule.The 56-15 Assembly vote marked a victory for labor unions and a defeat for tech companies that vehemently oppose the proposal.Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has already said he supports it.If signed, the proposal could have national implications as politicians and businesses confront the changing nature of work in the so-called gig economy.In a rare injection of presidential politics into a state issue, most of the major Democratic presidential contenders urged California lawmakers to pass the bill and have championed similar proposals in their campaigns."This isn't perfect, but I think this goes a long way to protecting workers, legitimate small businesses, legitimate businesses that play by the rules, and we as taxpayers that have to clean up the mess when these businesses don't provide enough for their workers," said the author of the bill, Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez, her voice shaking with emotion Wednesday.Newsom is committed to continuing talks on other refinements even after he signs the bill, said governor's spokesman Nathan Click,The state Senate passed the measure with a 29-11 vote late Tuesday over strident Republican opposition.The bill has drawn staunch opposition from on-demand delivery and ridesharing companies that say it will effectively kill their business model.Drivers are divided on the issue.By picking which industries can use independent contractors and which workers must be treated as employees, "we are playing a political Russian roulette with their lives, their livelihood and their labor," said Republican Assemblyman Jim Patterson of Fresno.The bill would put into law a California Supreme Court decision making it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors and instead would make them classify the workers as employees.While its impact on gig economy companies has drawn most of the attention, it would affect a wide array of industries."Today these so-called gig companies present themselves as the so-called innovative future of tomorrow," Democratic Sen. Marie Elena Durazo of Los Angeles said as she presented the bill in the Assembly late Tuesday. "Let's be clear. There is nothing innovative about underpaying someone for their labor."The law lays out a test to decide if workers can be labeled as contractors. They worker must be free from control of the company, perform work "outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business," and be engaged in an independently established trade, occupation or business of the same nature of the work they are performing.Uber, Lyft and meal delivery companies such as Doordash and Postmates still hope Newsom can negotiate a new proposal with unions that would create a separate set of rules for gig workers.They have proposed a base hourly for workers, paying into a fund for benefits including accident coverage and allow for "sectoral bargaining," where workers across the industry could organize. Several of the companies have threatened to spend million on a ballot measure next year if they do not get their way.They've argued that making their workers employees would limit workers' abilities to work flexible hours of their choosing.Gonzalez says nothing in the law forces the companies to eliminate worker flexibility. As employees, the workers would be entitled to minimum wage and benefits such as workers compensation, unemployment insurance and paid leave.Federal law still considers gig workers independent contractors, so it's unclear if a state law making them employees would allow workers to unionize.Sen. Mike Morrell of Rancho Cucamonga was among Republican opponents of the bill, many of whom told emotional stories of their own entrepreneurial success."This is just another assault on the free market, and again, it is a slouch toward socialism when government controls what business does," Morrell said. 4125

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- Amid mounting frustration over wait times at the California DMV, the department has redesigned portions of its website to make access to services easier. The redesigned portions include the website’s homepage and real ID page.“We are constantly modernizing our website with the customer in mind,” DMV Director Jean Shiomoto said.The changes come on the heels of news that California lawmakers can avoid the long lines at the DMV by visiting a private office near the Capitol not open to the public.RELATED: Private DMV office provides services to California lawmakersThe Sacramento Bee reported that the special DMV office in the legislative office building provides services for current and retired lawmakers as well as their staff and some other state employees.The redesign also comes amid mounting frustrations over longer and longer lines at statewide DMV offices and increased fees for vehicle registration.RELATED: California lawmakers ask DMV officials about long lines 1034

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- Wednesday, State Treasurer John Chiang and the brother of one of the Las Vegas shooting victims called on board members of an educator-only pension fund to stop investing in the sellers of military-style assault weapons, ammunition and other devices banned in California.Jason Irvine, the brother of slain San Diego attorney Jennifer Irvine (pictured below), said he found out his sister had been shot the morning after the shooting when his sister’s friends called him.RELATED: San Diego attorney among victims of Las Vegas concert shootingIrvine recalled the moment on Wednesday saying, “I was told that Jennifer was dancing and having the time of her life one moment, and then shot dead through the head in the next.”CalSTRS is the largest educator-only pension fund in the world, according to their website. As of September, the fund managed a portfolio worth more than 5 billion.RELATED: Names of everyone killed in Las Vegas mass shooting“Why would CalSTRS invest the money of school teachers in companies that sell weapons that injure and kill school teachers,” Irvine said of CalSTRS.“No brother should have to bury his sister or receive her ashes in a box because she was shot by a military-style weapon,” said Irvine.A number of gun law advocates also spoke out at the event.  1338

RIVERSIDE, Calif. – Authorities in California believe they’ve solved a 25-year-old cold case rape.The Riverside Police Department announced Friday that officers had apprehended 49-year-old Ralph Leslie Kroll in connection with the sexual assault of an 18-year-old woman in October 1995.Police say the victim was walking when she was attacked by a stranger, forced into a nearby apartment complex and assaulted.Investigative leads were exhausted and it remained a cold case until police say DNA evidence was able to identify Kroll as a suspect.After obtaining an arrest warrant for Kroll, police teamed up with the U.S. Marshals Service to locate and arrest him at his Eastvale home on Thursday. Kroll was then booked into the Robert Presley Detention Center on charges of rape by force, kidnapping, and the use of a deadly weapon by a sex offender. He's being held on a million bail.Anyone with additional information regarding this investigation and arrest should contact Detective Karla Beler at (951) 353-7138 or kbeler@riversideca.gov. 1050