BILL ANALYSIS
AB 591
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 17, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Anthony Portantino, Chair
AB 591 (Dymally) - As Amended: March 26, 2007
SUBJECT : Community colleges: Non-tenure-track temporary
faculty employees
SUMMARY : Makes several statutory changes related to parity in
salaries and benefits for part-time and temporary faculty in the
California Community Colleges (CCC). Specifically, this bill :
1)Changes the definition of a temporary employee from one who
teaches for not more than 60% of the hours per week considered
to be a regular full-time faculty assignment to one who
teaches less than 100% of the hours per week that constitutes
a regular full-time faculty assignment.
2)Renames a "temporary employee" in Education Code Section
87482.5 (a) (1) to be a "non-tenure track temporary faculty
employee."
3)Provides definitions to be used in this section, including:
a) "Non-tenure track" means a faculty member who teaches a
number of hours per week equal to or less than a full-time
faculty member but is not on a tenure track;
b) "Parity basis" means equal pay for equal work; and,
c) "Temporary" means a faculty member whose position is for
a limited term and does not qualify him or her for
evaluation for the possible conferral of tenure.
4)Requires that a non-tenure track temporary faculty employee
shall receive pay and benefits equal to the pay and benefits
received by tenured and tenure-track faculty with comparable
qualifications doing comparable work on a parity basis.
5)Stipulates that a non-tenure track temporary faculty employee
who teaches at least 40% of a full load shall receive the same
health care benefits that are received by tenured and
tenure-track faculty in the same CCC district.
AB 591
Page 2
6)Requires a CCC district to reduce the gap in salaries and
benefits between non-tenure track temporary faculty employees
and tenured and tenure-track faculty by 50% each year until
salaries and benefits are on a parity basis.
7)Requires a CCC district to hire at least 50% of its full-time
tenure-track faculty from the pool of its qualified non-tenure
track temporary faculty employees.
8)Recognizes that all benefits, load calculations, and hiring
may be subject to collective bargaining that includes
representatives of non-tenure track temporary faculty
employees and requires the CCC Chancellor's Office (CCCCO) to
enter into and conclude negotiations with a CCC district on
behalf of employees not represented by a bargaining unit.
EXISTING LAW defines a person who teaches not more than 60% of
the hours per week considered a full-time assignment for a
regular employee having comparable duties as a temporary
employee.
A complete summary of existing law regarding the employment of
community college faculty is beyond the scope of this analysis,
however it is important to note there are extensive, complex
statutes, many of which apply to full-time, part-time,
temporary, contract and other academic employees, in a wide
array of situations related to multiple aspects of district
employment.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. According to the author, the cost is
estimated to be $100 million.
COMMENTS : What is the purpose of this bill ? According to the
author, existing law creates a class of employees, now called
"part-time faculty," who are allowed to teach no more than 60%
of full-time teaching load. The author states, "The continuing
exploitation of part-time faculty in the community college
system is the result of enforcing obsolete legislation that was
designed to protect the community college system from externally
funded temporary and contract instructors qualifying for
tenure-track positions once those funding sources were
exhausted." He notes part-time faculty are routinely excluded
from basic benefits, do not have paid office hours or office
space and receive significantly less pay than similarly
AB 591
Page 3
qualified full-time faculty. Citing previous legislation and
regulations, he says, "The net result of this two-tiered
instructional system prevents all faculty from providing the
best educational opportunities for all community college
students."
The author also points out that this system has led many faculty
members to teach in multiple districts at the same time (so
called "freeway flyers") and that the State should not rely so
heavily on such exploitation to keep the colleges functioning.
Community college faculty teaching loads and salaries :
According to the CCCCO in its "Report on Staffing for Fall
2006:"
There are 59,821 faculty in the system. On a
headcount basis, 18,196 are tenured or tenure-track
faculty (30%) and 41,625 are academic temporaries (70%).
When calculated on a full-time equivalent (FTE) basis,
there are 36,025 FTE faculty, 57% that are tenured or
tenure-track, and 43% that are temporary.
The average salary for a tenured or tenure-track
faculty member is $78,498, ranging from a high of
$106,958 at Mira Costa to a low of $57,233 at
Southwestern. Salaries for temporaries are not provided
in the same format. The average hourly rate for an
academic temporary in credit instruction is $62.86; in
non-credit instruction the hourly average is $47.46.
Of the 41,625 academic temporaries, 3,393 work at
multiple districts.
Scope : This bill applies to both credit and non-credit faculty.
The report of the California State Auditor : A June 2000 report
by the Bureau of State Audits (BSA), "Part-time Faculty Are
Compensated Less Than Full-time Faculty for Teaching
Activities," found significantly lower wages and benefits
provided to part-time faculty. The report states, "Depending on
one's policy perspective, the unequal compensation of part-time
faculty either creates problems that should be addressed or
reflects an appropriate balance of market conditions at the
local level that should not be tampered with." In noting that
the existing pay disparity creates an incentive for college
districts to utilize part-time faculty, BSA points out such an
incentive is not in keeping with standards that stress the
importance of maintaining a balance, but on the other hand
AB 591
Page 4
mandating equal pay for equal work could interfere with the
collective bargaining process and limit local flexibility.
Districts interviewed for this report cited their dependence on
the State for financial resources and indicated funds are not
sufficient to meet all of their needs. The BSA estimated the
cost for eliminating all existing pay differences to be about
$144 million annually. At the time of the report, the headcount
ratio of full-time to part-time faculty was 33% to 67%.
The report of the California Postsecondary Education Commission
(CPEC) : Pursuant to AB 420 (Wildman), Chapter 738, Statutes of
1999, CPEC produced a report on CCC part-time faculty salaries.
This report echoed the findings of the BSA, noting that on an
average (after converting hourly wages to an adjusted annual
comparison) part-time faculty earned 50-60% of a comparable
full-time faculty salary. CPEC also noted wide variation by
district, geography and academic discipline, and also indicated
that 41% of part-time faculty reported they received no
benefits.
Tenure-track status for less than full-time faculty : In a few
instances, districts employ tenured or tenure-track faculty on a
less-than-full-time basis. Existing law permits academic
employees to request a reduction to part-time status. This bill
would apparently require a district to classify a person who
teaches less than 100% load as non-tenured. Is this desirable?
Requirement for achieving parity : This bill requires a district
to reduce the salary and benefit gap by 50% each year until
parity is achieved. Taken to its extreme, the gap could be
reduced to a miniscule amount but could never be eliminated by
being cut in half each year. When or if the author considers
amendments for this bill, this technical error should be
corrected, perhaps by requiring "at least 50% each academic
year." This is not recommended as a current committee
amendment, however, because it is still unclear how a district
might reduce a gap in benefits by precisely 50%.
Ambiguity regarding improved benefits : This bill is somewhat
ambiguous regarding its intent for improved benefits for a
non-tenure track temporary faculty employee. In one instance
this bill requires "equal" benefits for all such employees, in
another it requires "same" benefits for those who teach at least
40% of the full-time load, and in another it requires districts
to close the gap by 50% per year. These provisions are
AB 591
Page 5
conflicting and should be clarified.
What is a "pool" of "qualified" employees ? This bill requires a
district to hire at least 50% of its full-time tenure-track
faculty from a "pool" that is not defined and limits the pool to
"qualified" employees, which is also not defined. These
provisions should be clarified.
Collective bargaining responsibilities at the CCCCO : Is it
appropriate to place collective bargaining responsibilities at
the Chancellor's Office? Employees are normally represented in
collective bargaining by a union that they, or at least some of
them, have selected as their representative and to which they
pay dues and in which they have some ability to influence the
positions it takes. The CCCCO would have no such relationship
with the employees, and this bill is silent on what would happen
if there were different ideas about how to handle the
negotiations. Under current law an employee can go to the
Public Employee Relations Board and file an unfair practice
claim against his or her union if the employee feels he or she
is not being properly represented. Would they be able to do this
to the CCCCO? If so, it would create an awkward situation with
little precedent to guide the outcome.
There are governance issues as well. The CCCCO has
relationships with the districts on various levels. For
example, it is a CCCCO responsibility to ensure that districts
comply with the full-time/part-time ratio regulations as well as
to ensure that districts do full and open recruitment for all
faculty positions. If, in addition to these oversight
responsibilities, the CCCCO had to negotiate with the districts
on behalf of some portion of employees on the same matters,
conflict-of-interest situations could arise.
If this is an appropriate function for the CCCCO, what resources
would be necessary for the agency to meet these obligations? No
resources are provided in this bill. And finally, in order to
prevent conflict with existing statute, this bill would need to
amend to the Educational Employment Relations Act in the
Government Code that governs collective bargaining in the CCC.
Note: In a late amendment, the author has removed this
provision.
Should these goals be achieved by collective bargaining ? This
AB 591
Page 6
bill mandates salary and benefit issues within individual CCC
districts. Such items are within the purview of collective
bargaining and could be achieved through those means.
Faculty representation in the CCC : Faculty in the CCC are
represented by unions with collective bargaining and lobbying
duties, by associations with lobbying duties, and by the
Academic Senate for the CCC, which provides leadership in
matters of educational policy. Faculty unions include the
California Teachers Association, the California Federation of
Teachers (CFT) and the Community College Independents and the
Communication Workers of America. Associations include the
Faculty Association of the California Community Colleges and the
sponsor of this bill, the California Part-Time Faculty
Association, among others. Among the 72 districts there is a
wide variety of representation, including some in which all
faculty (full-time and part-time) are represented by a single
union and some by multiple unions. There is also a wide variety
of unit designations, some with units divided at 50% teaching
load, some divided at 60% teaching load or not at all. Within
this mixture there is also overlapping membership in various
associations.
Arguments in opposition : In its letter of opposition, the CFT
notes this bill reduces faculty ability to gain tenure,
increases the number of contingent and non-tenure track faculty,
amends statutory definitions related to faculty that have been
well worked out through the collective bargaining process,
appears to eliminate tenure for some faculty who have earned it,
and requires salary parity without defining what that is. CFT
also notes that colleges do not currently track part-time
employees in a manner that creates a pool for future employment
and that this bill is silent on the consequences of
non-compliance and thus it opposes the mandate that colleges
hire at least 50% of probationary and regular faculty from this
pool. Finally the CFT expresses opposition to a collective
bargaining role for the Chancellor. The Community College
League, in its letter of opposition, also notes that it believe
local district diversity goals would be thwarted by requiring
50% of full-time faculty to be hired from the pool of temporary
faculty.
Related Legislation : AB 420 (Wildman), Chapter 738, Statutes of
1999, required CPEC to conduct a study of part-time faculty
salaries. AB 1343 (Mendoza), pending in the Assembly, requires
AB 591
Page 7
CSU and CCC to determine a minimum salary goal for part-time and
temporary faculty and to close the salary gap with full-time
faculty by 2014-15.
Request for amendments by author : The author requests the
committee take amendments to 1) address minor technical issues
and 2) to remove sections establishing a role for the CCCCO in
collective bargaining.
Proposed amendments from the author:
Technical: Page 2, line 5, strike "less than" replace
with "up to"
Technical: Page 3, line 38, after "Section 84362" add
"except in accordance with Section 87481 and Section 87482
of the Education Code.
Substantive: Page 4, line 10, strike "While" and on line
13, strike "in the event that no bargaining unit
represents non-tenure track temporary employees, the
chancellor's office shall enter into, and conclude,
negotiations on behalf of non-tenure track temporary
faculty employees in the district."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Part-Time Faculty Association (Sponsor)
Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO, District 9
California Teachers Association and its Community College
Association (Sponsor)
Numerous California Community College Faculty
Opposition
California Federation of Teachers
Community College League
Analysis Prepared by : Mary Gill / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960