BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     AB 195
                                                                     Page  1

        CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
        AB 195 (Roger Hernández)
        As Amended July 11, 2011
        Majority vote
         
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
        |ASSEMBLY:  |51-23|(May 5, 2011)   |SENATE: |24-14|(August 18,    |
        |           |     |                |        |     |2011)          |
         ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          
         Original Committee Reference:    P.E.,R.& S.S.  

         SUMMARY  :  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.  
        Specifically,  this bill  :  

        1)Prohibits a public agency employer from doing any of the 
          following:

           a)   Imposing, or threatening to impose, reprisals on employees 
             who exercise their rights under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act 
             (MMBA);

           b)   Denying to employee organizations rights guaranteed to them 
             under the MMBA;

           c)   Refusing or failing to meet and negotiate in good faith with 
             an exclusive representative or to knowingly provide an employee 
             organization with inaccurate information regarding the 
             financial resources of the employer;

           d)   Dominating or interfering with the formation or 
             administration of an employee organization; and, 

           e)   Refusing to participate in good faith in impasse procedures, 
             as specified.

        2)Declares it is the intent of the Legislature that the addition of 
          this section to the Government Code is technical and clarifying of 
          existing law.
         
        The Senate amendments  revise and recast the bill's provisions.









                                                                     AB 195
                                                                     Page  2

         EXISTING LAW  :

        1)Prohibits, as established by the MMBA, local public agencies and 
          employee 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)Prohibits, as established under the Educational Employment 
          Relations Act (EERA), also known as the Rodda Act, a public school 
          employer from doing any of the following:

           a)   Impose, or threaten to impose, reprisals on employees who 
             exercise their rights under the EERA;

           b)   Deny to employee organizations rights guaranteed to them 
             under the EERA;

           c)   Refuse or fail 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)   Dominate or interfere with the formation or administration 
             of an employee organization; and, 

           f)   Refuse to participate in good faith in impasse procedures, 
             as specified.

         AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar to 
        the version approved by the Senate.

         FISCAL EFFECT  :  Unknown

         COMMENTS  :  According to the author, "The MMBA states that public 
        agencies may not interfere, intimidate, restrain, coerce or 
        discriminate against employees because of their exercise of 
        protected rights.  This sweeping provision has been interpreted by 
        the Courts, and now by the Public Employment Relations Board, in a 
        manner that is substantially similar to the clearly outlined 
        protections in the EERA.  The substantive difference between the 
        courts' interpretation of the MMBA and the EERA is the prohibition 








                                                                     AB 195
                                                                     Page  3

        in the latter against providing inaccurate information.  AB 195 
        would eliminate any confusion related to unfair labor practices by 
        setting for a list of unfair practices that are prohibited under the 
        MMBA.  These unfair practices mirror those prohibited under the 
        EERA."

        Supporters state, "AB 195 will clarify what specific acts against an 
        employee and an employee organization constitute a violation of the 
        law.  This will also include failing to negotiate in good faith, 
        knowingly providing false information to the union, interfering with 
        a union, or refusing to participate in impasse proceedings.  The 
        protections for concerted activity are essential to collective 
        bargaining rights.  Greater clarity benefits management and workers 
        in complying with the law."

        According to opponents, "With the enactment of SB 739 (Solis), 
        Chapter 901, Statutes of 2000, a transfer of the administration of 
        the MMBA was made to the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB).  
        Accordingly, PERB adopted regulations for public agencies setting 
        forth unfair labor practices for both employers and employee 
        organizations.  These regulations are substantially similar to the 
        unfair labor practice definitions under the EERA.  The provisions in 
        AB 195 are unnecessary and duplicative and we are unaware of any 
        reason as to why existing regulations must be codified in statute."

        Opponents conclude, "AB 195 would additionally expand upon existing 
        regulations by prohibiting public agencies from providing employee 
        organizations with 'inaccurate information'.  This differs from 
        current unfair labor practice language under the EERA, which 
        specifies 'inaccurate information' as pertaining to financial 
        resources.  Prohibiting public agencies from providing any 
        unspecified inaccurate information to employee organizations is 
        considerably broader than prohibitions place on other public 
        employers and leaves those agencies under the MMBA open to a bevy of 
        unfair labor practice charges and with the burden of proving that 
        any information provided to the employee organizations was 
        accurate."


         Analysis Prepared by  :    Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916) 
        319-3957                            FN:  0001637












                                                                     AB 195
                                                                     Page  4