BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 646
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 646 (Atkins)
As Amended June 22, 2011
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |50-25|(June 1, 2011) |SENATE: |23-14|(August 31, |
| | | | | |2011) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: P.E.,R.& S.S.
SUMMARY : Allows local public employee organizations to request
fact-finding if a mediator is unable to reach a settlement
within 30 days of appointment, defines certain responsibilities
of the fact-finding panel and interested parties, and makes
specified exemptions from these provisions. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Requires the fact-finding panel shall meet with the parties
within 10 days after appointment and take other steps it deems
appropriate. Specifies that the fact-finding panel consist of
one member selected by each party and a chairperson selected
by the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) or by
agreement of the parties.
2)Authorizes the fact-finding panel to make inquiries and
investigations, hold hearings, and take any other steps it
deems appropriate, and to issue subpoenas requiring the
attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of
witnesses.
3)Requires state and local public agencies, if requested by the
panel, to furnish the panel with all records, papers and
information in their possession relating to any matter under
investigation by the panel.
4)Specifies the criteria the fact-finding panel should be guided
by in arriving at their findings and recommendations.
5)Requires the fact-finding panel to make findings of fact and
recommend terms of a settlement if the dispute is not settled
within 30 days. This information must first be provided to
the parties before being made available to the public.
AB 646
Page 2
6)Requires the costs of the chairperson of the fact-finding
panel to be paid for by both parties whether or not PERB
selected the chairperson. Any other costs incurred will be
borne equally by the parties, as specified.
7)Allows an employer to implement their last, best and final
offer once any applicable mediation and fact-finding
procedures have been exhausted and despite the implementation
of the best and final offer, allows a recognized employee
organization the right each year to meet and confer.
8)Exempts a charter city, charter county, or a charter city and
county that has a procedure, as specified, that applies if an
impasse has been reached between the public agency and a
bargaining unit regarding negotiations to which the impasse
procedure applies.
The Senate amendments exempt a charter city, charter county, or
a charter city and county that has a procedure, as specified,
that applies if an impasse has been reached between the public
agency and a bargaining unit regarding negotiations to which the
impasse procedure applies.
EXISTING LAW , as established by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act
(MMBA):
1)Contains various provisions intended to promote full
communication between public employers and their employees by
providing a reasonable method of resolving disputes regarding
wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment
between public employers and public employee organizations.
2)Provides that if, after a reasonable amount of time,
representatives of the public agency and the employee
organization fail to reach agreement, the two parties may
mutually agree on the appointment of a mediator and equally
share the cost. If the parties reach impasse, the public
agency is not required to proceed to interest arbitration and
may implement its last, best and final offer.
3)Authorizes a local public agency to adopt reasonable rules and
regulations after consultation in good faith with
representatives of an employee organization or organizations
for the administration of employer-employee relations under
the MMBA.
AB 646
Page 3
4)Delegates jurisdiction over the employer-employee relationship
to PERB and charges PERB with resolving disputes and enforcing
the statutory duties and rights of local public agency
employers and employee organizations.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version approved by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)Based on the staffing that PERB estimated was necessary to
administer the bill, the fiscal impact of administering the
provisions of this bill is approximately $200,000.
2)There could be substantial state mandated reimbursement of
local costs. The amount would depend on the number of
requests for fact finding. PERB staff raised the possibility
of exceeding 100 cases annually in the first years of the
program. Assuming an individual case is likely to cost around
$5,000, with the local agency footing half the bill,
reimbursable costs could exceed $2.5 million. The Commission
on State Mandates has approved a test claim for any local
government subject to the jurisdiction of PERB that incurs
increased costs as a result of a mandate, meaning their costs
are eligible for reimbursement. Increasing the waiting time
before fact finding can begin should reduce the costs
slightly.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "Currently, there is no
requirement that public agency employers and employee
organizations engage in impasse procedures where efforts to
negotiate a collective bargaining agreement have failed.
Without impasse procedures, negotiations may not be fully
effective, and bargaining may break down before all avenues for
agreement are explored. Many municipalities and public agencies
promulgate local rules which include impasse rules and
procedures. However, this requirement is not uniform, and the
lack of uniformity may serve to create confusion and
uncertainty.
"The creation of mandatory impasse procedures is likely to
increase the effectiveness of the collective bargaining process,
by enabling the parties to employ mediation and fact-finding in
AB 646
Page 4
order to assist them in resolving differences that remain after
negotiations have been unsuccessful. Mediators are often useful
in restarting stalled negotiations, by encouraging dialogue
where talks have broken down; identifying potential areas where
agreement may be reached; diffusing tension; and, suggesting
creative compromise proposals. Fact-finding panels can also
help facilitate agreement, by making objective, factual
determinations that can help the parties engage in productive
discussions and reach reasonable decisions."
Opponents state, "AB 646 undermines a local agency's authority
to establish local rules for resolving impasse and the
requirement that a local agency engage in factfinding may delay
rather than speed the conclusion of contract negotiations."
Opponents go on to say they are not aware of any abuses or
short-comings of the current process and question the need for
making such an important change in the process of reaching a
collective bargaining agreement.
Opponents conclude, "Most importantly, the provisions in AB 646
could lead to significant delays in labor negotiations between
public employers and employee organizations and result in
additional costs to public employers at a time when public
agencies are struggling to address budget shortfalls and
maintain basic services for their residents. AB 646 would
provide a disincentive for employee organizations to negotiate
in good faith when there exists the option of further processes
under the PERB that will prolong negotiations. Most
collectively bargained contracts are stalled due to cost-saving
measures being sought by the public agency in a downturned
economy; requiring mediation and fact finding prior to imposing
a last, best and final offer would simply add costs and be
unhelpful to both the employer and the employees."
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957
FN: 0002141