BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT
Dr. Richard Pan, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 950 Hearing Date: 4/11/16
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Nielsen |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |3/31/16 As amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Glenn Miles |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Excluded employees: arbitration
SOURCE: Association of California State Supervisors
California Correctional Supervisors Organization
DIGEST: This bill establishes the Excluded Employee
Arbitration Act which would authorize binding arbitration on
behalf of an excluded state employee for alleged violations of
working conditions, as specified, whose grievance has not been
resolved after the fourth level of review.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Establishes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) which sets
forth a framework that governs labor relations between the
State and state employees.
2)Excepts from the Dills Act's definition of state employee:
managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory
employees, and other employees, as defined.
3)Establishes the Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees
which defines excluded employees as those employees excepted
from the Dills Act.
4)Provides that the purpose of the Bill of Rights for State
Excluded Employees includes informing excluded employees of
SB 950 (Nielsen) Page 2 of ?
their rights and terms and conditions of employment and also
serves to promote harmonious personnel relations among those
representing state management in the conduct of state affairs.
5)Prohibits excluded employees from holding office in employee
organizations representing rank and file employees or
participating in any employee representational matters on
behalf of non-excluded employees.
6)Provides that excluded employee organizations shall have the
right to represent their excluded members in their employment
relations, including grievances, with the State of California.
7)Authorizes supervisory employees to form, join and participate
in the activities of supervisory organizations of their own
choosing for purposes of representation on all matters of
supervisory employee relations, as provided, or to refrain
from so doing. They also have the right to represent
themselves individually in their employment relations with the
state employer.
8)Authorizes the California Department of Human Resources
(CalHR) to adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the
administration of employer-employee relations.
This bill:
1)Creates the Excluded Employee Arbitration Act which authorizes
an employee organization that represents an excluded employee
to request binding arbitration when the following conditions
are met:
a) The excluded employee has filed a grievance with CalHR
alleging a violation of Title 2, California Code of
Regulations.
b) The grievance has not been resolved satisfactorily at
the fourth level of review.
c) In cases where there is no fourth level of review, the
employee organization requests arbitration in writing to
CalHR within 21 days of a decision rendered at the third
level of review.
2)Defines arbitration as the binding ruling that resolves an
SB 950 (Nielsen) Page 3 of ?
excluded employee grievance at the fifth level of the excluded
employee grievance process.
3)Following a request for arbitration, requires CalHR and the
employee organization to designate a standing panel of at
least 20 arbitrators to be made available for resolving
arbitrations authorized by this bill.
4)Provides that if fewer than three arbitrators are available,
then the employee organization or the employer may obtain the
names of an additional five arbitrators from the California
State Mediation and Conciliation Service within the Department
of Industrial Relations.
5)Sets forth a process whereby the employee organization and the
employer may consecutively strike any arbitrator from the
arbitration panel until the name of one arbitrator is agreed
upon, or, if no agreement is made, the last remaining person
on the panel shall be designated the arbitrator. The name of
that arbitrator shall be submitted in writing to the CalHR.
6)Provides that if the employee organization does not submit its
choice of an arbitrator within 45 days after requesting
arbitration, the request for arbitration shall be considered
withdrawn.
7)Requires the arbitrator to issue a decision for each grievance
heard during the arbitration. The decision shall be based
solely on the written record in the grievance, the grievance
response, and the oral presentations made at the arbitration.
The arbitrator's decision shall be legally binding.
8)Mandates that the arbitrator issue a written decision within
45 days of the conclusion of the hearing.
9)Orders that the non-prevailing party pay the cost of the
arbitration.
Background
Current law authorizes the California Department of Human
Resources (CalHR) to adopt reasonable rules and regulations for
the administration of employer-employee relations. CalHR has
adopted regulations that set out a Grievance and Appeal
Procedure for excluded employees.
SB 950 (Nielsen) Page 4 of ?
Under Title 2, Section 599.859 of the California Code of
Regulations, supervisory employee organizations or individual
supervisors may pursue resolution of disagreements over issues
with their employer that fall within the jurisdiction of CalHR
through a grievance procedure that typically includes an
informal review and four formal levels of review by the employer
according to the following timeline:
Informal Level: Within 5 work days of the incident, an
informal discussion between the excluded employee and the
employee's supervisor or manager.
Level 1: If unsatisfied with the informal review, the
employee may file a formal grievance within 10 work days of
the incident and the employer's designee for the first
level of review must respond within 10 working days.
Level 2: The employee may appeal the employer's Level 1
decision within 10 work days of receipt of the employer's
response and the employer's designee for the second level
of review must respond within 15 work days.
Level 3: The employee may appeal the employer's Level 2
decision within 10 work days of receipt of the employer's
response and the employer's designee for the third level of
review must respond within 15 work days.
Level 4: The employee may appeal the employer's Level 3
decision to CalHR within 10 work days of receipt of the
employer's response and CalHR's designee for the fourth
level of review must responds within 20 work days.
Upon denial at the fourth level of review, the employee or the
employee organization representing the employee may pursue a
claim with the State Personnel Board, the Department of Fair
Employment and Housing, or the State Superior Court depending on
the issue in dispute.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 1584 (Evans, 2006), died in Senate Appropriations, would have
permitted an excluded employee to request mediation after the
fourth level of review.
SB 950 (Nielsen) Page 5 of ?
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.: Yes Local: No
SUPPORT:
Association of California State Supervisors (co-source)
California Correctional Supervisors Organization (co-source)
Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs
California Association of Code Enforcement Officers
California College and University Police Chiefs Association
California Narcotic Officers' Association
Civil Justice Association of California
Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association
Los Angeles Police Protective League
Professional Engineers in California Government
Riverside Sheriffs' Association
OPPOSITION:
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the sponsor, "the excluded
employee grievance system is virtually illusory for excluded
employees."
"Of all the grievances filed, 99% are denied because there is no
consequence for the state agency to not follow the rules, and
there is no objective oversight." Thus, employee organizations
respond by filing lawsuits in court to combat the most egregious
cases that they believe should be granted in the grievance
process.
"The inability to have arbitration has cost the state
unnecessary litigation costs. This bill will bring a more
meaningful effort to resolve issues and problems at a much lower
level and save the taxpayer money."