BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó

                                                                      AB 1066

                                                                      Page  1


          1066 (Gonzalez)

          As Amended  May 14, 2015

          Majority vote

          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                |Noes                   |
          |Public          |6-0   |Bonta, Waldron,     |                       |
          |Employees       |      |Cooley,             |                       |
          |                |      |Jones-Sawyer,       |                       |
          |                |      |O'Donnell, Rendon   |                       |
          |                |      |                    |                       |
          |Higher          |10-3  |Medina, Bloom,      |Baker, Chávez, Harper  |
          |Education       |      |Irwin,              |                       |
          |                |      |Jones-Sawyer,       |                       |
          |                |      |Levine, Linder,     |                       |
          |                |      |Low, Santiago,      |                       |
          |                |      |Weber, Williams     |                       |
          |                |      |                    |                       |
          |Appropriations  |12-5  |Gomez, Bonta,       |Bigelow, Chang,        |
          |                |      |Calderon, Daly,     |Gallagher, Jones,      |
          |                |      |Eggman,             |Wagner                 |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,     |                       |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,     |                       |
          |                |      |Quirk, Rendon,      |                       |
          |                |      |Weber, Wood         |                       |


                                                                      AB 1066

                                                                      Page  2

          SUMMARY:  Revises the definition of "short-term employee" to  
          require the position not to continue on a year-after-year basis in  
          a school district or community college. 

          EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Authorizes school districts and community college districts to  
            employ non-academic employees, and requires those employees to  
            be placed in the classified service, as specified.
          2)Prohibits, generally, the following from being part of the  
            classified service:

             a)   Substitute and short-term employees employed and paid for  
               less than 75% of a school year.
             b)   Apprentices and professional experts, as specified.

             c)   Full-time and part-time students employed part-time in a  
               college work-study or work experience program, as specified.

             d)   Part-time playground positions where the employee is not  
               otherwise employed in a classified position.

          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, significant Proposition 98 (1988)/General Fund cost  
          pressures on school districts and community colleges, potentially  
          in the millions of dollars, to provide increased employment  
          benefits (health and retirement benefits, vacation, holiday and  
          sick leave) to thousands of workers not currently serving in a  
          classified position.

          COMMENTS:  Current law defines "substitute" and "short-term"  


                                                                      AB 1066

                                                                      Page  3

          employees as those employed and paid for less than 75% of a school  
          year or college year.  These employees are not part of classified  
          service.  This bill extends the definition of "short-term"  
          employee to also prohibit this designation of employee from  
          continuing on a year-after-year basis.  As a result, if the school  
          district or community college decides to continue employment of a  
          currently designated "short-term" employee beyond one year, the  
          school district or community college would need to deem the  
          position part of classified service.

          Inclusion in classified service confers statutory rights and  
          benefits to employees, such as a process for obtaining permanent  
          status, due process rights, fixed and delineated work duties,  
          vacation days, holidays and other benefits.

          The California Federation of Teachers is sponsoring this bill to  
          prevent "wrongful exclusions" of employees from classified  
          service. They state current law and practice has resulted in a  
          permanent class of temporary' employees.  They support this bill  
          to "uphold and protect the original intent of creating a permanent  
          classified service."

          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957   
          FN: 0000601


                                                                      AB 1066

                                                                      Page  4