BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                       AB 466

                                                                      Page  1


          466 (McCarty)

          As Amended  March 26, 2015

          Majority vote

          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |Public          |5-2   |Bonta, Cooley,        |Waldron, Wagner     |
          |Employees       |      |Jones-Sawyer,         |                    |
          |                |      |O'Donnell, Rendon     |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |Appropriations  |12-5  |Gomez, Bloom, Bonta,  |Bigelow, Chang,     |
          |                |      |Calderon, Daly,       |Gallagher, Jones,   |
          |                |      |Eggman, Eduardo       |Wagner              |
          |                |      |Garcia, Holden,       |                    |
          |                |      |Quirk, Rendon, Weber, |                    |
          |                |      |Wood                  |                    |

          SUMMARY:  Specifies that provisions requiring state employment  
          forms to require an applicant to disclose whether he or she has  
          ever entered into an agreement with the state prohibiting them  
          from seeking or accepting any subsequent employment with the state  
          do not apply if the agreement prohibits him or her from seeking  
          employment with a particular state agency and not all state  


                                                                       AB 466

                                                                      Page  2

          EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Provides, pursuant to the California Constitution  Article VII,  
            Section 1, that the civil service includes every officer and  
            employee of the state except as otherwise provided, and that in  
            the civil service, permanent appointment and promotion be made  
            under a general system based on merit ascertained by competitive  

          2)Requires, pursuant to the Civil Service Act, state employment to  
            be based on the merit principle; that appointments are based  
            upon merit and fitness ascertained through practical and  
            competitive examination; and that tenure of civil service  
            employment is subject to good behavior.

          3)Requires the California Department of Human Resources and the  
            Department of Fair Employment and Housing to work cooperatively  
            to develop uniform employment forms where possible pursuant to  
            the provisions of the Civil Service Act and coordinate their  
            enforcement of the Civil Service Act.

          4)Requires that each state agency to use the standard employment  

          5)Requires, as enacted by SB 1240 (Anderson), Chapter 254,  
            Statutes of 2014, state employment forms to require an applicant  
            for employment to disclose whether the person has ever entered  
            into an agreement with a state agency or department prohibiting  
            the applicant from seeking or accepting any subsequent  
            employment with the state.

          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, minor and absorbable costs to CalHR and state agencies  


                                                                       AB 466

                                                                      Page  3

          to update employment forms.

          COMMENTS:  Currently, when a state employer terminates a civil  
          service employee, the employee is entitled to appeal the dismissal  
          to the independent State Personnel Board (SPB).  The SPB has the  
          discretion to sustain, revoke, or modify the termination.   
          Generally, a prehearing and settlement conference is set to offer  
          both parties a chance to meet and negotiate a settlement of their  
          case prior to a full hearing before the SPB. 

          According to the author, "Settlement conferences offer an  
          opportunity for both the employee and employer to address the  
          issue without having to go through the expense and uncertainty of  
          a formal evidentiary hearing.  At these settlement conferences, a  
          wide range of proposals can be made, including proposals that  
          prohibit the employee from seeking or accepting subsequent  
          employment with their particular department or with the state as a  
          whole.  The ability to negotiate such separation agreements is a  
          key tool for both the State and the employee to effectively and  
          efficiently resolve their differences in the settlement  
          negotiation process."

          The author concludes, "While the intent of SB 1240 is clear, the  
          language is unclear if all applicants, including those that have  
          agreed to never seek or accept subsequent employment with a  
          particular department, would be required to disclose such an  
          agreement.  This could discourage both the employee and the State  
          from engaging in the settlement negotiation process, and result in  
          higher numbers of cases before the SPB at taxpayer's expense."

          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957   
          FN: 0000278


                                                                       AB 466

                                                                      Page  4