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 13, 2012
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 specifies that a person who is employed to teach
for not more than 67% of the hours per week is considered a
full-time assignment to be a temporary (part-time) employee.
(Education Code § 87482.5 and § 87882)
Existing law establishes the issue of earning and retaining
annual reappointment rights as 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
a result of workforce reductions and other adjustments.
AB 852
Page 2
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
assignments.
AB 852
Page 3
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
temporary faculty. The specifications, details, and
AB 852
Page 4
processes by which preference rights are earned vary
widely across the agreements. The agreements are unique
to district conditions and local needs and may change
when contracts are renegotiated. For example, the
part-time faculty may be willing to agree to new
conditions 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
considerable variation in reappointment policies across
districts making it difficult for temporary faculty who
teach in more than one district to plan their teaching
schedules. Opponents however argue that mandating one
system for all districts could limit what can be
bargained during contract negotiations. In some
districts, AB 852 will have the effect of adding a
benefit without the faculty having to negotiate for that
benefit.
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, district policy, or
state or federal law that provides for greater or
additional requirements, guarantees, or protections than
those provided under this act, the bill provides
temporary community college faculty with a specific
benefit and establishes the criteria for earning that
benefit, which would reduce the flexibility of local
districts and their faculty to bargain other terms and
conditions for rights for teaching assignments. Could
this bill have the effect of abrogating any CBA in which
the negotiated preference rights are 'less than' the
benefit provided in AB 852?
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
AB 852
Page 5
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
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. Although the bill would
require a faculty member to have recently performed the
assignment, 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 the
discipline.
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 administrative
hardship that will significantly restrict a district's
flexibility to manage in an increasingly dire fiscal
environment. The Community College League also argues
that the requirements imposed by this bill could be
especially difficult for multiple college districts and
small rural districts.
Although a CCC district could 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 estimated ongoing implementation and
processing "just cause" complaints could be
AB 852
Page 6
approximately $10,000 for each CCC. Given the
significant 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) Update the implementation date to July 1,
2013.
b) 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, 2013, the requirements shall
become operative on the faculty governed by that
agreement upon its expiration unless the new CBA
provides faculty greater rights.
c) 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.
d) 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 and is pending in the Assembly.
AB 1826 (Mendoza) prohibits a full-time faculty member from
being assigned overload or extra assignments exceeding
AB 852
Page 7
50% of the full-time semester or quarter workload, as
specified. This measure is pending before this
Committee.
SUPPORT
AFT Guild, Local 1931
California Federation of Teachers
California Part-time Faculty Association
California Teachers Association
Communications Workers of America
Faculty Association of California Community Colleges
Individual letters
OPPOSITION
Antelope Valley Community College District
Association of California Community College Administrators
Association of California Community College Administrators
Barstow Community College
Chabot-Las Positas Community College District
College of the Desert
Community College League
Kern Community College District
Long Beach Community College District
Los Rios Community College District
Mendocino College
MiraCosta Community College District
Napa Valley Community College District
Peralta Community College District
Rancho Santiago Community College District
San Diego City College
San Diego Community College District
Santa Clarita Community College District
Santa Monica College
West Kern Community College District