BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 195|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 195
Author: Roger Hernández (D)
Amended: 6/6/11 in Senate
Vote: 21
SEN. PUBLIC EMPLOY. & RETIRE. COMMITTEE : 3-2, 6/27/11
AYES : Negrete McLeod, Padilla, Vargas
NOES: Walters, Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-23, 5/5/11 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Local public agency employers: prohibited
activities
SOURCE : American Federation of State, County and
Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
DIGEST : This bill declares the intent of the Legislature
to provide technical and clarifying changes to existing law
by providing a list of actions that a public agency
employer is prohibited from engaging in regarding the
exercise of guaranteed public employee rights.
ANALYSIS :
Existing law:
1.Establishes the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) which
prohibits local public agencies and employee
CONTINUED
AB 195
Page
2
organizations from interfering with, intimidating,
restraining, coercing or discriminating against public
employees because they have chosen to join, or not join,
an employee organization.
2.Grants public employees the right to form, join, and
participate in the activities of employee organizations
of their own choosing for the purpose of representation
on all matters of employer-employee relations.
3.Grants public employees the right to refuse to join or
participate in the activities of employee organizations
and to represent themselves individually in their
employment relations with the public agency.
4.Establishes the Educational Employment Relations Act
(EERA) which specifically prohibits a public school
employer from doing any of the following:
A. Imposing, or threatening to impose, reprisals on
employees who exercise their rights under the EERA.
B. Denying employee organizations' rights guaranteed
to them under the EERA.
C. Refusing or failing to meet and negotiate in good
faith with an exclusive representative.
D. Knowingly providing an exclusive representative
with inaccurate information, whether or not in
response to a request for information, regarding the
financial resources of the public school employer.
E. Dominating or interfering with the formation or
administration of an employee organization.
F. Refusing to participate in good faith in impasse
procedures, as specified.
This bill:
1.Amends the MMBA to contain certain prohibitions that are
similar to provisions under the EERA.
CONTINUED
AB 195
Page
3
2.Prohibits a public agency employer subject to the MMBA
from doing any of the following:
A. Imposing or threatening to impose reprisals on
employees, discriminating or threatening to
discriminate against employees, or interfering with,
restraining, or coercing public employees because of
their exercise of rights under the MMBA.
B. Denying employee organizations' rights guaranteed
to them under the MMBA.
C. Refusing or failing to meet and negotiate in good
faith with an exclusive representative.
D. Knowingly providing an employee organization with
inaccurate information, as specified.
E. Dominating or interfering with the formation or
administration of an employee organization,
contributing financial or other support to any
employee organization, or encouraging employees to
join any organization in preference to another.
F. Refusing to participate in good faith in impasse
procedures, as specified.
3.Declares the intent of the Legislature that the addition
of this section to the Government Code is technical and
clarifying of existing law.
Comments
Need for the Bill . According to the author's office, the
MMBA prohibits certain activities by a public agency
employer against employees because of their exercise of
protected rights. "However, the MMBA does not provide a
comprehensive list of unfair practices that a public agency
employer is enjoined from committing, Ýwhich] may cause
confusion on the part of the public agency Ýas to] whether
its actions create a risk of liability, Ýand] may leave
employees uncertain of their rights under the MMBA.
"This bill sets forth a list of unfair practices that are
CONTINUED
AB 195
Page
4
prohibited under the MMBA Ýand] mirror those prohibited
under the EERA."
Related Legislation
SB 931 (Vargas), 2011-12 Session, prohibits public agencies
from using public funds to pay external consultants or
legal advisors to counsel the employer on how to minimize
or deter the exercise of guaranteed public employee rights
related to employer-relations. Passed the Senate with a
vote of 24-12 on May 16, 2011. (On Assembly Floor)
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/30/11)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
(source)
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO, District Council 36
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO, Local 685
California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit
Union
California Conference of Machinists
California Labor Federation
California State Employees Association
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
Glendale City Employees Association
Los Angeles Probation Officers Union
Organization of SMUD Employees
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
San Bernardino Public Employees Association
San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
Santa Rosa City Employees Association
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/30/11)
Association of California Water Agencies
California Special Districts Association
California State Association of Counties
CONTINUED
AB 195
Page
5
Desert Water Agency (oppose unless amended)
East Valley Water District (oppose unless amended)
El Dorado Irrigation District (oppose unless amended)
League of California Cities
Regional Council of Rural Counties
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the sponsor, the
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO, "Current law has been interpreted by
the courts and the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB)
in manner that is substantially similar to the protections
in the EERA. However, the MMBA does not contain a similar
list of prohibitions by public employer agencies regarding
unfair practices against public employees and employee
organizations. This bill would clarify which acts by a
public agency employer that constitute unlawful and unfair
practices prohibited under the MMBA, and would make
existing policy more transparent by identifying a clear
list of unfair practices in the MMBA."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : According to the California
State Association of Counties (CSAC), "ÝPursuant to SB 739
of 2000], the PERB adopted regulations for public agencies
defining unfair labor practices for both employers and
employee organizations. These regulations are
substantially similar to the unfair labor practice
definitions under the EERA. ÝThis bill] expands those
protections to applicants for employment or reemployment.
Counties do not seek the right to discriminate and believe
s that applicants for employment have protections against
discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act,
but objects to conferring rights on applicants for
employment. This goes beyond current law and is not part
of the MMBA or PERB's regulation of the relationship
between public employees and represented employees."
Similar to CSAC's concerns, other opponents contend that
this bill expands existing regulations by prohibiting
public agencies from knowingly providing employee
organizations with "inaccurate information" which
specifically pertains to financial resources under the
EERA, and that this bill would increase PERB's duties and
costs related to MMBA administration.
CONTINUED
AB 195
Page
6
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 51-23, 5/5/11
AYES: Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Atkins, Beall, Block,
Blumenfield, Bonilla, Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan,
Butler, Charles Calderon, Campos, Carter, Cedillo,
Chesbro, Davis, Dickinson, Eng, Feuer, Fong, Fuentes,
Galgiani, Gatto, Gordon, Hall, Hayashi, Roger Hernández,
Hill, Huber, Hueso, Huffman, Lara, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel Pérez,
Portantino, Skinner, Solorio, Swanson, Torres,
Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. Pérez
NOES: Achadjian, Bill Berryhill, Conway, Cook, Donnelly,
Fletcher, Grove, Hagman, Halderman, Harkey, Jeffries,
Knight, Logue, Mansoor, Miller, Morrell, Nestande, Norby,
Olsen, Silva, Smyth, Valadao, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Furutani, Garrick, Gorell, Jones,
Nielsen, Vacancy
CPM:cm 6/28/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED