BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 852
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 852 (Fong) - As Amended: March 21, 2011
Policy Committee: Higher
EducationVote:6-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill, effective July 1, 2012, provides temporary community
college faculty members meeting certain requirements with the
right of first refusal for teaching assignments. Specifically,
this bill:
1)Requires a temporary faculty member who has been employed at a
college for at least four of the preceding eight semesters or
six of the preceding 12 quarters, and whose most recent
evaluation was satisfactory to have the right of first refusal
for an assignment in that district that the faculty member has
performed within the preceding eight semesters or 12 quarters.
2)Provides that a faculty member may be denied the above right
only for just cause, must be notified promptly in writing of
the just cause, and is entitled to a procedure to promptly
challenge the denial. Just cause includes a district decision
not to offer the assignment because of reduced funding,
enrollment, or program changes.
3)Stipulates that greater reemployment rights than those
specified in (1) may be provided in a collective bargaining
agreement or otherwise be provided by a district.
FISCAL EFFECT
Community college districts that do not have collective
bargaining agreements or otherwise provide reemployment rights
that meet or exceed the requirements of this bill would incur
one-time costs to establish or modify their reemployment
procedures, with ongoing costs to implement these procedures,
AB 852
Page 2
including responding to challenges to denials for just cause.
The number of districts and colleges impacted and the associated
costs are unknown. These costs would likely be minor for
individual districts or colleges, but could be significant
statewide and all costs would be state reimbursable. Assuming
two-thirds of the 109 colleges are impacted, and, on average,
incur one-time costs in 2011-12 of $5,000 for establishment and
initial implementation and ongoing costs starting in 2012-13 of
$10,000 for continued implementation and processing "just cause"
complaints, statewide General Fund (Proposition 98) costs would
be $365,000 in 2011-12 and $730,000 annually thereafter.
COMMENTS
1) Background . For over 20 years, the Legislature has
considered various efforts to address the issue of
community college districts (CCDs) hiring temporary
(part-time) faculty members in lieu of full-time faculty.
Much of the reason to utilize temporary faculty is the
lower cost associated with such faculty. Several studies on
temporary faculty found that CCDs pay temporary faculty
significantly less than full-time faculty performing the
same duties, and nearly half of temporary faculty reported
not receiving any type of benefits from their district. In
2008, 18,200 members of CCC teaching faculty were full-time
(tenure or tenure track) and 45,257 classified as
temporary.
Current law requires that the issue of reappointment rights
for temporary faculty be a subject of negotiation during
collective bargaining and provides that reappointment rights
may be based on whatever factors are agreed to by both
parties. Many districts have thus formalized such practices
through the bargaining process. This bill establishes minimum
parameters for all CCDs regarding the reemployment rights of
temporary faculty, but allows for greater rights through the
collective bargaining process.
2) Purpose . The California Federation of Teachers (CFT)
argues that California's higher education system has become
far too dependent on a poorly compensated, temporary
workforce lacking basic support and benefits. According to
CFT, the flexibility to negotiate reemployment policies at
each CCD has resulted in unfair and unreliable reemployment
practices in some districts. Additionally, many temporary
AB 852
Page 3
faculty create full-time teaching schedules through
employment in two or more districts. The varying
reemployment policies among CCDs make it difficult for
temporary faculty to plan their teaching schedules. CFT
contends that establishing a more uniform reemployment
policy requiring preference lists, and ranking employees
with rights of first refusal to teaching assignments in
their faculty service area will ensure fair reemployment
practices, thus increasing stability for temporary faculty
and their students.
3) Opposition . The Community College League of California
notes that many of California's 72 CCDs have collective
bargaining agreements including some form of preference
rights for temporary faculty, although these may differ in
specifications, details, process, and how rights are
earned. The League argues that mandated terms for right of
refusal as specified in this bill could be inconsistent
with the number and schedule of courses at each college,
which vary depending on programmatic and student
educational needs, and fiscal challenges faced by a college
district. The League argues this could be especially
difficult for multiple college districts and small rural
districts.
4) Prior Legislation . In 2010, a similar but much more
prescriptive bill, AB 1807 (Fong), was held on this
committee's Suspense file.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081