BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 496
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   July 3, 2013

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                    SB 496 (Wright) - As Amended:  June 25, 2013 

          Policy Committee:                               
          JudiciaryVote:10-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill clarifies rights and procedures under the California  
          Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA) and related statutes.  
          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Clarifies that there are two different administrative hearings  
            contemplated by the WPA-an initial informal hearing and an  
            evidentiary hearing.  

          2)Codifies case law holding that a complainant has exhausted  
            required administrative processes by filing a complaint with  
            the State Personnel Board (SPB) and waiting the required 70  
            working-day statutory period if the board has not first issued  
            findings of the informal hearing or investigation, following  
            which the complainant is entitled to file an independent civil  
            action. 

          3)Permits the SPB, as an exception to the civil action, to  
            consolidate a complaint with a related appeal of disciplinary  
            action filed by the same complainant. 

          4)Provides that a civil action filed by the whistleblower does  
            not preclude an accused department or manager from requesting  
            an evidentiary hearing through the administrative process, nor  
            does the request of an accused department or manager for an  
            evidentiary hearing under the administrative process preclude  
            a whistleblower from filing a civil action.

          5)Clarifies that an action for damages pursuant to the  
            California Whistleblower Protection Act is exempt from the  
            presentation requirements of the Government Claims Act.








                                                                  SB 496
                                                                  Page  2


          6)Prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee for  
            disclosing, or refusing to participate in an activity that  
            would result in, a violation of or noncompliance with a local  
            rule or regulation.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Minor absorbable costs to the SPB and the Department of Human  
            Resources, as the bill is generally consistent with current  
            practice and existing caseloads are not significant. According  
            to the SPB's most recent Whistleblower Complaint Report, for  
            2011, 62 whistleblower retaliation complaints were filed. Of  
            those, 12 were accepted, of which nine were dismissed and  
            three were consolidated with a pending evidentiary hearing.

          2)Any costs to local governments will not be state reimbursable.
           
          COMMENTS  

           Purpose  . This measure clarifies rights and procedures under the  
          California Whistleblower Protection Act and related laws,  
          codifying case law regarding court review and more explicitly  
          setting forth administrative and judicial processes, and  
          updating related whistleblower protections against retaliation.   
          Supporters argue that clarification will improve protections and  
          give greater guidance to parties, administrative agencies and  
          the courts. 

          There is no known opposition to this bill.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081