BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
2015-2016 Regular Session
AB 874 (Santiago)
Version: June 13, 2016
Hearing Date: June 21, 2016
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
ME
SUBJECT
Collective bargaining: Judicial Council
DESCRIPTION
This bill would amend the Ralph C. Dills Act to make it
applicable to Judicial Council employees, thereby providing
Judicial Council employees the right to join an employee
organization and collectively bargain. This right would extend
to all Judicial Council employees except managerial employees,
confidential employees, supervisory employees, government
affairs employees, and human resources employees.
BACKGROUND
The California Constitution (Constitution) designates most State
employees as members of the Civil Service. However, the
Constitution specifies that some State employees are "at will"
employees and not members of the civil service. As an example,
legislative employees and Judicial Council employees are
excluded under the Constitution from civil service and are "at
will" employees. Due to the Constitutional constraint, the
Legislature cannot convert Judicial Council employees into
members of the civil service. However, the Legislature can
statutorily grant any "at will" public employees the right to
join an employee organization and collectively bargain.
The Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) allows state executive branch
employees to bargain collectively for their wages, hours, and
terms and conditions of employment. Under the Dills Act,
managers and confidential employees are not granted collective
bargaining rights. This bill would make the Dills Act
applicable to Judicial Council employees, thereby providing
Judicial Council employees the right to join an employee
organization and collectively bargain with their employer--the
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 2 of ?
Judicial Council. Under the bill, the collective bargaining
rights would extend to all Judicial Council employees except
managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory
employees, government affairs employees, and human resources
employees.
This bill was heard in Senate Public Employment and Retirement
Committee on June 13 2016, and passed out of the Committee on a
3-2 vote.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law provides that the civil service includes every
employee of the State except as provided in the Constitution.
(Cal. Const. art. 7, Sec. 1.)
Existing law exempts some State employees from the civil
service, including legislative employees and officers and
employees appointed or employees by councils, commissions or
public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of
record or officer thereof. (Cal. Const. art. 7, Sec. 4.)
Existing law , the Ralph C. Dills Act, provides rights of
collective bargaining for state employees, as defined, the
mechanism for exercising those rights, and the obligations of
the state employees, Governor, and employee organizations.
(Gov. Code Secs. 3512-3524.)
Existing law defines "state employees" for the purpose of the
Ralph C. Dills Act as any civil service employee of the state,
and the teaching staff or schools under the jurisdiction of the
State Department of Education or the Superintendent of Public
Instruction. (Gov. Code Sec. 3513(c)(1).)
Existing law excludes the following from the definition of
"state employees" for the purposes of the Ralph C. Dills Act:
managerial, confidential, and supervisory employees;
employees of the Department of Human Resources;
professional employees of the Department of Finance
engaged in technical or analytical state budget preparation
other than the auditing staff;
professional employees in the Personnel/Payroll Services
Division of the Controller's office engaged in technical or
analytical duties in support of the state's personnel and
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 3 of ?
payroll systems other than the training staff;
employees of the Legislative Counsel Bureau;
employees of the Bureau of State Audits;
employees of the office of the Inspector General;
employees of the board, conciliators employed by the
California State Mediation and Conciliation Service;
employees of the Office of the State Chief Information
Officer except as specified; and
intermittent athletic inspectors who are employees of
the State Athletic Commission. (Gov. Code Sec.
3513(c)(1).)
Existing law provides that state employees, as defined by the
Ralph C. Dills Act, have the right to form, join, and
participate in the activities of employee organizations of their
own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of
employer-employee relations. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.)
Existing law provides that employee organizations shall have the
right to represent their members in their employment relations
with the state, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.5.)
Existing law provides that the scope of representation shall be
limited to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.6.)
Existing law provides that the Governor or his representative as
may be properly designated by law shall meet and confer in good
faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment with representatives of recognized employee
organizations, and shall consider fully such presentations as
are made by the employee organization on behalf of its members
prior to arriving at a determination of policy or course of
action. (Gov. Code Sec. 3517.)
Existing law provides that the Governor and the recognized
employee organization shall jointly prepare a written memorandum
of understanding (MOU) when they reach agreement and shall
present the MOU to the Legislature for determination. (Gov.
Code Sec. 3517.5.)
Existing law provides that if the Governor and employee
organization fail to reach an agreement within a reasonable
period of time, the Governor and the organization may agree upon
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 4 of ?
the appointment of a mediator, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec.
3518.)
This bill extends the provisions of the Ralph C. Dills Act to
all Judicial Council employees, except managerial employees,
confidential employees, supervisory employees, employees in the
offices of human resources, and employees in the offices of
government affairs.
This bill clarifies that the provisions of the Ralph C. Dills
Act do not apply to judicial officers or employees of the
Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus
Resource Center.
This bill provides that the employer for purposes of bargaining
or meeting and conferring in good faith, for the Judicial
Council employees, means the Administrative Director of the
Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with
the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council.
This bill excludes the Judicial Council employee organization
and Administrative Director of the Courts or designated
representative from the requirement of preparing a written
memorandum of understanding (MOU) when they reach agreement and
from the requirement to present the MOU to the Legislature for
determination, and from other provisions related to the Ralph C.
Dills Act MOU requirement.
This bill provides that the Judicial Council employees may not
be included in a bargaining unit that includes employees other
than those of the Judicial Council.
COMMENT
1.Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
Since Judicial Council employees are expressly exempt from
state civil service rules by Article 7 Section 4(b) of the
California Constitution, the Dills Act does not confer
bargaining rights for Judicial Council employees. As a
result, Judicial Council employees are not represented by
a union, but would like to be. The Government Code cannot
be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 5 of ?
service employees due to the state's constitutional
prohibition. However, the Dills Act can be amended to
confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees to
allow them union representation if they choose to. Since
Judicial Council employees are state employees, the Dills
Act may be an appropriate framework for providing
collective bargaining rights.
2.Judicial Council employees want the opportunity to organize
and collectively bargain
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 1000,
represents 95,000 public employees statewide and is the sponsor
of this bill. According to the sponsor, "Judicial Council
employees approached [SEIU, Local 1000] asking the [union] to
represent them in bargaining." SEIU, Local 1000 is sponsoring
this bill to allow the Judicial Council employees a path to
union representation if the "employees organize themselves and
choose to be represented." According to the Judicial Council,
they have "adopted a neutral position on the policy of AB 874."
As currently drafted, this bill would exclude managerial
employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees
from the Judicial Council employee bargaining unit. Similarly,
under the Dills Act, managerial employees, confidential
employees, and supervisory employees are excluded from the state
employee bargaining units. Staff notes that a typical agency
in the Executive branch would exempt managerial, confidential,
and supervisory employees from the bargaining unit. Staff also
notes that California trial court employees are entitled to
collectively bargain under the Trial Court Employment Protection
and Governance Act. (See Gov. Code Secs. 71600-71618.)
3.The Bargaining Unit
The author previously agreed to exclude employees in the
Judicial Council's offices of human resources and government
affairs from the bargaining unit. However, the author reports
that after the most recent amendments SEIU Local 1000 and the
Judicial Council agreed to a bargaining unit that simply
excludes managerial, supervisorial, and confidential employees.
The agreement also allows the Judicial Council to designate the
confidential positions so long as the managerial, supervisory,
and confidential positions exempted do not exceed one-third of
the total permanent full-time Judicial Council employees. The
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 6 of ?
author proposes the following amendments to reflect the
agreement regarding the appropriate bargaining unit.
Author's amendments:
On page 4, in line 38, strike out "confidential
employee, or"
On page 4, in line 39, after "supervisory employee"
insert: "or a confidential employee as defined in (e)"
On page 4, in line 40, strike out "include:" and insert
"include a"
On page 5, in line 1, strike out "(A) A"
On page 5, strike out lines 3, 4, and 5 entirely
On page 5, after "Judicial Council." insert "(e) The
Judicial Council has the authority to designate state
employee positions and confidential positions.
Managerial, supervisory, and confidential positions
exempted under this provision shall not exceed one
third of the total permanent full-time Judicial Council
employees."
Support : California Labor Federation
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO; Service Employees International
Union, Local 1000
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation : AB 2381 (Hernández, 2012) This bill would
have amended the Ralph C. Dills Act to make it applicable to
Judicial Council employees. This bill was held in Senate Public
Employment and Retirement Committee.
AB 874 (Santiago)
Page 7 of ?
Prior Vote :
Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee (Ayes 3, Noes
2)
Assembly Floor (Ayes 52, Noes 25)
Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 12, Noes 5)
Assembly Public Employees, Retirement/Soc Sec Committee (Ayes 6,
Noes 1)