BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 874
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
874 (Rendon)
As Amended March 26, 2015
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
|----------------+------+----------------------+---------------------|
|Public |6-1 |Bonta, Waldron, |Wagner |
|Employees | |Cooley, | |
| | |Jones-Sawyer, | |
| | |O'Donnell, Rendon | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+----------------------+---------------------|
|Appropriations |12-5 |Gomez, Bonta, |Bigelow, Chang, |
| | |Calderon, Daly, |Gallagher, Jones, |
| | |Eggman, Eduardo |Wagner |
| | |Garcia, Gordon, | |
| | |Holden, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Makes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to
specified employees of the Judicial Council. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Specifies that the Dills Act applies to employees of the Judicial
AB 874
Page 2
Council.
2)Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial
Council except for managerial, confidential, and supervisory
employees.
3)Excludes from the definition of "state employee" any judicial
officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal,
or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.
4)Designates the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or
her designee, acting with the chairperson of the Judicial
Council's authorization, as the "employer" for purposes of
bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith.
5)Specifies that references to actions or decisions by the
Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act mean actions
or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, as
specified.
6)Specifically excludes certain provisions of the Dills Act
governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of
Understanding from applying to the Judicial Council and its
employees.
7)Requires the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) when
determining appropriate bargaining units for these employees to
not include them in a bargaining unit that includes other
employees.
EXISTING LAW:
AB 874
Page 3
1)The California Constitution:
a) Establishes the Judicial Council which has constitutional
responsibility to survey judicial business; study the
operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with
statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and
procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the
Governor, and the Legislature.
b) Exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed
or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in
the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer
thereof.
2)State law:
a) Provides collective bargaining for state employees of the
executive branch under the Dills Act which establishes a
process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions
of employment for represented employees. Managers and
confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.
b) Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial
court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection
and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
c) Establishes PERB, a quasi-judicial administrative agency,
to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering
public employees including school, college, state, local
agency, and trial court employees.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1)Annual General and Special Fund costs of $400,000 to $750,000 to
Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee
relations functions.
AB 874
Page 4
2)Increased ongoing employment costs following any salary or
benefits increases resulting from union bargaining.
COMMENTS: According to the author, "Judicial Council state
employees are currently not represented by a union but would like
to be. As the law stands currently, the Dills Act does not apply
to Judicial Council employees. Government Code cannot be amended
to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees, because
they are specifically exempted from civil service by Article 7 of
the California State Constitution. However, the Dills Act or the
Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) can be amended to confer bargaining
rights to Judicial Council employees.
"Trial court employees are already represented by SEIU pursuant to
the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
Judicial Council employees have requested that SEIU Local 1000
represent them in bargaining on the terms and conditions of
employment.
"SEIU Local 1000 believes that it can represent Judicial Council
employees under the current MMBA statute. However, the
applicability of the current MMBA statute to Judicial Council
employees can only be confirmed by going through a PERB
representation petition process. This process includes a
representation petition being submitted to PERB with the
appropriate number of authorizing employee signatures, and an
administrative hearing on the merits of the petition.
"In the event that PERB determines the MMBA, as currently drafted,
is inapplicable to Judicial Council employees, the proposed bill
serves to clarify that Judicial Council employees can be
represented by a union."
AB 874
Page 5
Based on information provided to the Committee by the Judicial
Council, there are approximately 574
non-managerial/non-supervisorial employees that could be impacted
by this bill.
Analysis Prepared by:
Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957 FN:
0000595