BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin de León, Chair
AB 537 (Bonta) - Local Government Impasse Procedures
Amended: August 12, 2013 Policy Vote: PE&R 3-2
Urgency: No Mandate: Yes
Hearing Date: August 19, 2013
Consultant: Maureen Ortiz
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: AB 537 makes several changes to the
Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) governing impasse procedures for
local agencies and their respective employee representation
organizations with respect to ground rules, ratifications of
MOUs, mediation, and arbitration procedures.
.
Fiscal Impact:
Approximately $940,000 in annual costs to the Public
Employees' Relations Board (General Fund)
Unknown, potentially significant reimbursable mandate costs
to local agencies (General Fund)
Background: Existing law establishes the Meyers-Milias-Brown
Act, which provides a statutory framework for local government
employer-employee relations by providing a reasonable method of
resolving disputes regarding wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment between local public employers and
public employee organizations.
Under MMBA, local public agencies are authorized to adopt
reasonable rules and regulations after consultation in good
faith with representatives of an employee organization or
organizations. A public agency is required to meet and confer
in good faith with the representatives of a recognized employee
organization regarding wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment. The Public Employment Relations Board
(PERB) is charged with resolving disputes and enforcing the
statutory duties and rights of local public agency employers and
employee organizations.
AB 537 (Bonta)
Page 1
Current law further provides that an agreement between the
parties shall not be final and binding upon the parties to the
negotiations until it is presented to the public agency's
governing body or statutory representative for determination.
If, after a reasonable amount of time, representatives of the
public agency and the employee organization fail to reach an
agreement, either party may request mediation. Within 5 days of
the mediation request, existing law requires both parties to
agree on the appointment of a mediator and equally share the
cost. However, there is no provision for when the parties
cannot agree on a mediator.
Current law authorizes an employee organization to request that
the parties' differences be submitted to a factfinding panel
following the appointment of a mediator or entering into a
mediation process, or following a written notice of a
declaration of impasse.
A public agency is allowed to implement its last, best and final
offer once any applicable mediation and factfinding procedures
have been exhausted. Current law provides that even with
implementation of the best and final offer, a recognized
employee organization has the right each year to meet and confer
with the public agency.
Proposed Law: AB 537 contains the following provisions:
a) Prohibits a public agency from proposing, as a condition
for meeting and conferring, ground rules that limit the
right of an employee or employee organization to communicate
with officials of the public agency.
b) Requires that if a tentative agreement is reached by the
authorized representatives of the public agency and a
recognized employee organization or recognized employee
organizations, that agreement shall be presented to the
governing body for determination and provides that the
governing body has thirty (30) days to reject the tentative
agreement or it shall be deemed adopted.
c) Clarifies that a decision by the governing body not to
adopt the tentative agreement shall not bar the filing of an
unfair practice charge for failure to have met and bargained
in good faith through authorized representatives.
AB 537 (Bonta)
Page 2
d) Requires, if the governing body adopts the tentative
agreement, that the parties shall jointly prepare a written
memorandum of understanding.
e) Authorizes either party to request mediation if they fail
to reach agreement.
f) Provides that an arbitration agreement contained in a MOU
is enforceable, as specified.
g) Requires a public agency to engage in the meet and confer
process before adopting reasonable rules and regulations
governing the administration of employer-employee relations
and specifies that disputes arising under this provision
will be resolved pursuant to the factfinding procedures of
the MMBA.
h) Extends the period of time whereby the parties must
mutually agree upon the appointment of a mediator from 5
days to 14 days of a request by one of the parties.
Related Legislation: AB 616 (Bocanegra), pending on this
committee's Suspense File also makes several changes to local
government impasse procedures.
Staff Comments: AB 537 makes changes to the MMBA that will
require additional workload to the PERB similar to its workload
under provisions of the Educational Employment Relations Act
(EERA), also under the jurisdiction of the Public Employment
Relations Board. In deriving the cost estimates, PERB is basing
the additional workload on a significant increase in mediation
workload resulting from a number of cases that are comparable to
those it receives annually under the EERA and the State
Mediation and Conciliation Service. Current estimates are based
on the need for 40 new mediator appointments each month,
entailing approximately 13 hours of work for each case, to
assist parties in resolving MMBA bargaining impasses.
Additionally, PERB estimates a significant increase in workload
due to the new provision requiring negotiations for the adoption
of local rules governing employer-employee relations. The exact
increase in workload to PERB is unknown, however, new
AB 537 (Bonta)
Page 3
regulations will need to be promulgated as well as the potential
for a large number of new unfair practice charges which will
require additional staff in the General Counsel's office to
process the charges, issue complaints or dismissals, and conduct
informal settlement conferences. Also, the Administrative Law
Division will need to conduct formal hearings and issue written
proposed decisions, process injunctive relief requests, and
handle court litigation whenever a local rule that was adopted
without the benefit of a meet-and-confer process is alleged to
be "unreasonable".
Local agencies will incur potentially significant costs related
to arbitration, mediation, and rule making procedures. These
costs will be reimbursable as a state mandate and paid from the
General Fund.