BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 874
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
874 (Santiago)
As Amended August 15, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |52-25 |(June 2, 2015) |SENATE: |25-12 |(August 18, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: P.E.,R., & S.S.
SUMMARY: Makes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to
specified employees of the Judicial Council. Specifically, this
bill:
1)Provides that the Dills Act applies to employees of the
Judicial Council, as specified.
2)Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the
Judicial Council except for managerial, supervisory, or
confidential employees, as specified.
3)Excludes from the definition of "state employee" any judicial
officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of
AB 874
Page 2
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, or his or her designated representative, acting with
the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
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)Prohibits the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), when
determining appropriate bargaining units for these employees,
from including them in a bargaining unit that includes
employees other than Judicial Council employees.
8)Provides that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and
discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded
positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential,
and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not
exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council
positions, as specified.
9)Specifies that designation of excluded positions by the
Judicial Council is subject to review by PERB.
The Senate amendments:
AB 874
Page 3
1)Change the author of the bill to Assemblymember Santiago.
2)Provide that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and
discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded
positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential,
and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not
exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council
positions, as specified.
3)Specify that designation of excluded positions by the Judicial
Council is subject to review by PERB.
4)Make other technical and clarifying changes.
EXISTING LAW:
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
AB 874
Page 4
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 Senate Appropriations
Committee, "Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of
thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish
and maintain labor and employee relations functions. To the
extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase
resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in
unknown increased ongoing employment costs."
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
AB 874
Page 5
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."
Based on information provided to the Committee by the Judicial
Council, there are approximately 575
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:
0004204