First, Here is the text as it stands right now:
|Hearing Date:April 13, 2009 |Bill No:SB |
| |374 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
Senator Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair
Bill No: SB 374Author:Calderon
As Amended:April 2, 2009 Fiscal: No
SUBJECT: Health care providers: personal trainers.
SUMMARY: Defines the term personal trainer, establishes
educational and training requirements for personal trainers
and prohibits individuals from calling themselves personal
trainers unless they meet those requirements.
Existing law:
1)Provides for the licensure and regulation of physical
therapists and physical therapy assistants by the Physical
Therapy Board of California (PTBC) within the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA).
2)Defines the practice of physical therapy as the art and
science of physical or corrective rehabilitation or of
physical or corrective treatment of any bodily or mental
condition of any person by the use of the physical, chemical
and other properties of heat, light, water, electricity,
sound, massage and active, passive and resistive exercise,
including physical therapy evaluation, treatment planning,
instruction and consultative services.
3)Provides for the licensure and regulation of occupational
therapists and occupational therapy assistants by the
California Board of Occupational Therapy (CBOT) within the
Department of Consumer Affairs.
4)Define the practice of occupational therapy, in part, as the
therapeutic use of purposeful and meaningful goal-directed
activities which engage the individual's body and mind in
SB 374
Page 2
meaningful, organized and self-directed actions that maximize
independence, prevent or minimize disability and maintain
health.
This bill:
1)Prohibits an individual from representing him or herself as or
using the title of personal trainer unless one of the two
following requirements is met:
a) The person has a bachelor's degree in exercise science,
kinesiology, fitness science or another closely related
field.
b) The person is certified by one of the following:
i) A national organization whose personal trainer
certification procedures are approved by the National
Commission for Certifying Agencies (NCCA).
ii) An organization accredited by either the Council for
Higher Education Accreditation or by the United States
Department of Education.
2)Specifies that "to hold himself or herself out as a, or use
the title of, personal trainer" means to state or advertise or
put out any sign, card or other device, or to represent to the
public through any print or electronic media, that he or she
is a personal trainer.
3)Defines "personal trainer" as an individual who has expertise
in developing and implementing physical fitness and training
programs for individuals and who provides those services for a
fee to individuals or through an organization (i.e. a fitness
center) that is compensated for making personal training
services available.
4)Excludes the following from the personal trainer definition:
a) Individuals who provide training in a particular
discipline (i.e. yoga or pilates)
b) Individuals who provide training on a particular piece
of equipment or device such as a bicycle but does not
SB 374
Page 3
include proving advice or assistance on other aspects of
physical fitness and training such as body weight
management, cardiovascular fitness, endurance and overall
muscle and strength development.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed "nonfiscal" by
Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. According to the Author, this measure is needed to
protect consumers from untrained physical trainers. The
Author states there are many reports of injury ranging from
pulled muscles to internal organ damage in the personal
training arena and consumers should have the right to know the
level of education and training prospective trainers have
before hiring one. He also believes trainers that have a high
level of education and training should be able to
differentiate themselves from fly by night instructors.
The Author states, "The term personal trainer can mean someone
with any level of training or education- including NO real
training or education. Depending on the gym, personal trainers
can be experts on the body and have extensive education, or
can be trainers with little to no real knowledge about how the
body works and responds to certain diets and exercise. This
can expose unwitting customers to trainers to push the
customer too hard or to do exercises that are not appropriate
and can actually do permanent harm to the person being
trained. Cases of abuses including blown-out knees, injured
backs and torn muscles are unfortunately not uncommon. While
some injuries cannot be planned for or easily avoided, many
could have been prevented if the trainer in question had
thorough knowledge of the body and its movement."
Because the term personal trainer is currently not defined or
regulated by the state, and there are not any minimum
standards or requirements for an individual to call him or
herself a personal trainer, the Author argues this measure
will require a reasonable amount of training or education to
ensure a level of knowledge that will protect consumers from
harm and injuries.
2.Background. In 2002 and 2003, then Assemblymember Lowenthal
introduced legislation on behalf of the California Athletic
Trainers Association (CATA) proposing licensure for athletic
SB 374
Page 4
trainers. AB 2789 (2001-02 Session) was amended to require a
study of the issue before being held on the Assembly
Appropriations Committee suspense file. AB 614 , (2003-04
Session) was held in Senate Business and Professions Committee
to allow the Joint Committee on Boards, Commissions and
Consumer Protection (Joint Committee) to examine whether
athletic trainers should be licensed as part of the "sunrise"
process.
In compliance with the sunrise process, CATA completed and
submitted the extensive "sunrise questionnaire" in support of
its proposal for licensure. The athletic trainer sunrise
proposal was heard by the Joint Committee in January 2005.
Following this hearing, the Joint Committee voted unanimously,
in April 2005, to reject full licensure of athletic trainers,
but suggested as part of this recommendation that some form of
recognition of athletic trainers, such as title protection,
may be appropriate.
In 2005, Senator Lowenthal introduced SB 1397 which would have
enacted the Athletic Trainers Certification Act, which
prohibited a person from representing him/herself as an
athletic trainer unless he/she is certified as an athletic
trainer by an athletic training organization. The bill would
have regulated the practice of athletic training by requiring
all individuals who use the title athletic trainer to meet
specific education standards, pass a certification exam,
complete continuing education and register with an athletic
training organization. The measure also made it an unfair
business practice for a registered athletic trainer to
advertise or publicly represent he or she is "state certified"
or "state registered" as an athletic trainer by the State of
California. Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the measure
claiming "there is no evidence that the existing unregulated
status of athletic trainers poses any threat to the public
health and safety" and this measure would place unnecessary
regulatory burdens on the athletic training profession.
In the sunrise questionnaire, CATA indicated that there about
2,200 certified athletic trainers in California. Only those
athletic trainers who have been certified by the Omaha-based
Board of Certification (an affiliate of the National Athletic
Trainers Association) are permitted to use the terms certified
athletic trainer" or "athletic trainer, certified." The Board
of Certification certifies athletic trainers who have met the
qualifications and passed a national written examination. To
SB 374
Page 5
sit for the exam, applicants for certification as an athletic
trainer must have completed a bachelor degree program in an
athletic training educational program accredited by the
Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education
Programs. In 2005, there were 12 accredited entry level
athletic training education programs in California, as well as
one graduate level program and an additional six entry-level
programs in candidacy for accreditation. Most of the
accredited programs are in the California State University
system.
The majority of certified athletic trainers in California are
employed in school settings, including four-year colleges and
universities, community colleges, and high schools.
Professional sports teams, clinics, hospitals industrial
settings or private health clubs employ the rest.
3.Legislation in Other States. A few other states have or are
considering legislation to regulate personal trainers. The
following is a list of the legislation:
Georgia Senate Resolution 1077 by Senators Jones and Seabaugh
was passed in 2005 to create the Senate Study Committee on the
Licensure of Personal Fitness Trainers to examine the state's
growing and unregulated personal fitness training industry and
make recommendations it deems necessary or appropriate to
provide consumer protection.
Maryland House Bill 814 of 2008 by Delegate Costa would have
required the Board of Physicians to license and regulate the
practice of personal training, required all personal trainers
to be licensed by October 1, 2010, and specified age,
education, and other credential requirements required for
licensure. The measure was withdrawn.
New Jersey is currently considering Senate Bill 2164 by
Senator Sarlo, which would require new personal trainers to
receive 300 hours of classroom instruction, including 50 hours
of unpaid internship and require existing trainers to enroll
in 150 hours of classroom instruction.
4.Suggested Amendments. While this measure defines the term
"personal trainer" and prohibits persons from representing
themselves as such to the public, it does not establish
penalties for persons who violate the provisions of this bill.
The Author may wish to consider amendments that make a
SB 374
Page 6
violation of this bill a violation of the fair business
practice or an infraction or misdemeanor with fines to serve
as a deterrent to those without the proper requirements.
NOTE : Double-referral to Rules Committee second.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support: None received as of April 8th.
Opposition: None received as of April 8th.
Consultant: Sieglinde Johnson
California Proposes Stricter Regulations on Personal Trainers California legislators are eyeing to pass Senate Bill 374 that would require all physical trainers in the state to acquire a four-year college degree in a related field of study before practicing physical training activities. The proposed law would require necessary degrees in exercise or fitness science and kinesiology, aside from current certifications from several national independent organizations.
Physical trainers across California are facing tougher and weightier oversights. The bill, which was filed by Senator Ron Calderon D-Montebello in February 2009 and passed in the Senate on April 24 the same year, is still yet to be imposed and enforced statewide. However, it has been receiving different kind of reactions, some are in favor, while others are in opposition.
Advocates and supporters of the bill assert that the proposed legislation would set standards and would ensure overall safety so that consumers could always be assured that professional standards are at hand. They add that strengthened oversight is necessary because personal training is imposing a direct effect on the well-being and health of a person.
Several clients are also raving about this new development. According to them, such stricter regulations would serve as an important safeguard especially these days when money is harder earned. Every investment, they added, should be able to yield significant and guaranteed results. Data from the National Academy of Sports Medicine show that on the average, fees collected by personal trainers reach about $40 to about $100 per hour. That is relatively costly, especially these days when the global financial crisis is still scattering its impact.
However, several sectors of the society are also skeptical over the proposed law. In particular, physical training practitioners and health clubs are mostly opposing the proposal. To them, there is no need to suddenly impose stringent oversights to a sector that has been self-regulating for many decades already. Some clients slam the proposal, saying they should be left to take responsibility of looking at trainers' qualifications. They want to spare the government from that task. To them, the state should focus on making ends meet, especially these days.
If implemented, Senate Bill 374 would set as a requirement submission of certifications from appropriate agencies that are accredited by no less than the US Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education. Several criteria and other requirements would be asked from personal trainers so those professionals could finally be formally and legally allowed to operate and provide training services to clients.
Proponents of the bill assert that the legislation has no ill intentions. Through the proposed law, the state government aims to screen out legitimate and qualified personal trainers from con artists. They also attest that the bill would serve as a protection clause that would guarantee consumers and clients that their investments in time, effort, and money would not be put to trash in the long run.
Some people raise the possibility that Senate Bill 374 would generate more income for the state. That is because penalties would be imposed to personal trainers who would be found declaring false qualifications. In that way, any costs to be incurred by implementation of the bill would be effectively offset by the state government.
Thus, tax payers would need not question the viability and independence of the bill because it surely would be able to pay for itself, and potentially add more to the state funds.
What do you think? Comment and I will forward your opinions to the authors of the bill.
Tags: SB374 Fitness Trainers Regulation Health Clubs
