BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-12 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 852
AUTHOR: Fong
AMENDED: June 22, 2011
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: June 29, 2011
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Beth Graybill
SUBJECT : California community colleges: temporary faculty.
SUMMARY
This bill, commencing on July 1, 2012, provides temporary
community college faculty who meet specified requirements the
right of first refusal for teaching assignments.
BACKGROUND
Existing law defines any person who is employed to teach for
not more than 67% of the hours per week considered a
full-time assignment to be a temporary (part-time) employee.
(Education Code § 87482.5 and § 87882)
Existing law establishes that the issue of earning and
retaining annual reappointment rights shall be a mandatory
subject of negotiation in the collective bargaining process
relating to any new or successor contract between community
college districts and temporary or part-time faculty. (EC §
87482.9)
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Makes findings and declarations regarding the employment
of temporary faculty to teach courses in the California
Community Colleges (CCCs); finds that temporary faculty
comprise over 40,000 of the current community faculty
statewide and teach approximately 45 percent of all
community college courses in California; finds that a
secure pool of temporary, and part-time faculty is
necessary to support students who require continuity of
quality instruction, and finds that temporary faculty
are being disenfranchised from the college workforce as
AB 852
Page 2
a result of workforce reductions and other adjustments.
2) Specifies this act should not be construed to diminish
or otherwise affect the requirements, guarantees, or
other protections under a collective bargaining
agreement, district policy, or state or federal law that
provides for greater or additional requirements,
guarantees, or protections than those provided under
this act.
3) Requires, commencing July 1, 2012, temporary community
college faculty to have the right of first refusal for
assignments, as specified, subject to any greater rights
provided in a collective bargaining agreement or
otherwise provided by a district.
4) Specifies that a temporary faculty member who has been
employed in a community college for at least four of the
preceding eight semesters or at least six of the
preceding 12 quarters and whose last evaluation, if any,
was satisfactory has the right of first refusal for an
assignment in the CCC district that the faculty has
performed within the preceding eight semesters or
preceding 12 quarters. Specifies that if two or more
temporary faculty members claim the same assignment, the
assignment shall be offered in the order of seniority.
5) Specifies that a faculty member may be denied the right
of first refusal only for just cause, which includes but
is not limited to, giving the assignment to a more
senior faculty member, failure of a faculty member to
make a timely request of the assignment in writing if
required by the district, or a district decision not to
offer the assignment due to recent low enrollment,
funding, or program changes.
6) Specifies that the right of first refusal of an
assignment shall not be construed as "reasonable
assurance" of employment for purposes of unemployment
compensation eligibility between academic terms.
7) Specifies that this legislation applies only to
assignments traditionally given to temporary faculty
members and further specifies that nothing in this
legislation shall apply to contract faculty members,
regular faculty members, or faculty overload
AB 852
Page 3
assignments.
8) Provides for local CCC districts to be reimbursed for
costs associated with complying with the requirements of
this act if the Commission on State Mandates determines
that the act contains mandated costs.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill : According to the author's office, CCC
districts are increasingly relying on part-time faculty
to provide instruction on community college campuses.
The author's office notes that California's 43,000
part-time CCC faculty represent nearly two-thirds of all
CCC faculty and teach approximately 40% of the CCC
classes. According to the California Federation of
Teachers (CFT), one of the sponsors of this bill,
part-time faculty earn 42% of what their full-time
colleagues make. A 2000 report by the California State
Auditor noted that part-time faculty earn lower wages
and receive fewer benefits for teaching activities than
full-time faculty with similar education and experience.
The Legislature has considered various measures over
the past 20 years that address the dependence of
California community colleges on part-time faculty and
the pay inequities between regular and temporary faculty
in the community colleges. The stated purpose of this
bill is to provide basic job security for temporary
faculty by requiring CCC districts to give part-time
faculty the first right of refusal to available teaching
assignments. This bill establishes minimum standards
for how part-time faculty can earn preferences for
teaching courses in a CCC district.
2) Collective bargaining implications . Current law
requires the issue of earning and retaining
reappointment rights for temporary faculty to be a
mandatory subject of negotiation in the collective
bargaining process. Each CCC district and the exclusive
representative of the part-time and temporary faculty
agree on the requirements for and rights of
reappointment in each new or successor collective
bargaining contract.
According to the Community College League, most community
colleges have collective bargaining agreements (CBAs)
that include some form of preference rights for
AB 852
Page 4
temporary faculty. The specifications, details, process
by which preference rights are earned vary widely across
the agreements and are unique to district conditions and
needs. For example, the part-time faculty may be
willing to increase requirements for earning preference
rights in exchange for better health benefits. CBAs are
tailored to meet the needs of the district and the
faculty, in consideration of a district's budget,
obligations, and curricular needs and priorities.
An argument could be made that current collective bargaining
contracts reflect the preference rights that were
bargained for within the context of relevant needs and
resources and in consideration of other issues the
district or faculty may have negotiated. However, the
CFT maintains that the flexibility to negotiate
preference rights at the local level has resulted in
unfair and unreliable practices in some districts and
argue that the variation in reappointment policies among
districts make it difficult for temporary faculty who
teach in more than one district to plan their teaching
schedules.
While the uncodified section of the bill states that the act
should not be construed to diminish or otherwise affect
the requirements, guarantees, or other protections under
a collective bargaining agreement or district policy,
the bill also makes the requirements for preference
rights subject to any greater rights provided in a
collective bargaining agreement. CBAs that grant better
preference rights than this bill would provide could
remain in place. Could this bill have the effect of
abrogating any CBA in which the negotiated preference
rights are 'less than' the rights provided in AB 852?
In some districts, AB 852 will have the effect of adding
a benefit without the faculty having to negotiate for
that benefit.
3) Curricular and administrative needs . By specifying that
a temporary faculty member may be denied the right of
first refusal only for just cause, this bill creates a
seniority-based security of employment for part-time
faculty that could make it more difficult for some
community colleges to meet their curricular and
administrative needs.
In most community college districts, part-time faculty
AB 852
Page 5
members are hired as a result of selections made by
department faculty. By establishing seniority rights to
reappointment, this bill could limit the ability of a
campus to hire the person most qualified to teach the
course or courses available. Under the provisions of
this bill, it is not clear that a part-time faculty
member's right to an assignment would be predicated on
his or her expertise in the subject, currency in their
discipline, or prior teaching experience at the campus
where the assignment is available. What if the campus
wants to offer a new course on Shakespearean Feminism
but the instructor at the top of the preference list is
a linguistics expert?
Although this bill specifies that the legislation does not
apply to regular faculty members or faculty overload
assignments, it is unclear how the seniority rights of
regular faculty might be affected by AB 852. Could this
bill result in part-time faculty having a preference to
courses that might otherwise be available to regular
faculty as an overload assignment? What about
reemployment rights of faculty members who have been
laid off? Opponents to this bill argue that the
mandated right of refusal could create significant
complexities in course scheduling and offerings.
While a standardized system may benefit part-time faculty who
work in more than one district and could give
part-timers job security, opponents argue that mandating
a one-size-fits-all system creates an additional
administrative hardship and will significantly restrict
a district's flexibility to manage an increasingly dire
fiscal environment. The Community College League has
also argued that the requirements imposed by this bill
could be especially difficult for multiple college
districts and small rural districts and could reduce the
flexibility of local districts and their faculty to
bargain other terms and conditions of a collective
bargaining contract.
Although a CCC district may save some administrative costs by
rehiring an existing instructor instead of hiring a new
part-time instructor, the bill could result in increased
costs if a CCC district experiences a rise in "just
cause" hearings. The Assembly Appropriations Committee
analysis estimates ongoing implementation and processing
"just cause" complaints could be approximately $10,000
AB 852
Page 6
for each CCC. Given the budget reductions CCC districts
are facing, could this bill make it more difficult for
districts to manage their limited resources?
Should the Committee wish to pass this bill, staff
recommends the following amendments:
a) Add language specifying that if the
requirements of this act are in conflict with the
terms of a collective bargaining agreement in
effect on July 1, 2012, the requirements shall
become operative on the faculty governed by that
agreement upon its expiration.
b) Add language to clarify that following a
layoff, the rights granted to terminated employees
as provided in Sections 87744 and 87745 must be
satisfied before giving part-time faculty the
reappointment preferences specified in this act.
c) Add language to specify that the assignment
for which the part-time faculty member has a
preferred right must be in the subject or subjects
the faculty member is qualified to teach as
determined by the CCC district.
4) Related and prior legislation . This bill is similar to
AB 1807 (Fong, 2010), which would have required a CCC
district that hires temporary employees to place those
employees on a reemployment preference list. This
measure was held in the Assembly Appropriations
Committee.
SB 114 (Yee) requires California community college districts
to place part-time faculty on a schedule of comparable
salary steps as full-time faculty with similar academic
preparation, as specified. This bill was passed by this
Committee on a 7-3 vote.
SUPPORT
California Federation of Teachers
California Part-time Faculty Association
California Teachers Association
Communications Workers of America
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
AB 852
Page 7
OPPOSITION
Antelope Valley Community College District
Association of California Community College Administrators
Community College League
Kern Community College District
Long Beach Community College District
Los Rios Community College District
Napa Valley Community College District
Peralta Community College District
Rancho Santiago Community College District
San Diego Community College District
Santa Clarita Community College District
Santa Monica College
West Kern Community College District