BILL ANALYSIS
SB 402
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 402 (Burton)
As Amended September 7, 1999
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :23-14
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 6-0 APPROPRIATIONS 14-7
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Correa, Dutra, Firebaugh, |Ayes:|Migden, Cedillo, Davis, |
| |Honda, Knox, Pescetti | |Hertzberg, Kuehl, Papan, |
| | | |Romero, Keeley, |
| | | |Steinberg, Thomson, |
| | | |Wesson, Wiggins, Wright |
| | | |R., Aroner, |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | |Nays:|Brewer, Ackerman, |
| | | |Ashburn, Campbell, |
| | | |Maldonado, Runner, Zettel |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Provides final and binding arbitration of disputes
regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment within the scope of arbitration between any local
agency employer and employee organizations representing its
firefighter or law enforcement employees. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Establishes in the Code of Civil Procedure Title 9.5,
"Arbitration of Firefighter and Law Enforcement Officer Labor
Disputes".
2)Provides statutory legislative findings and declarations
regarding the need for the arbitration procedures proposed by
this bill stating, in part, that strikes taken by firefighters
and law enforcement officers against public employers are a
matter of statewide concern and are not in the public
interest. Additionally, the legislative findings and
declarations state that the dispute resolution procedures
contained in this bill provide the appropriate method for
resolving public sector labor disputes that would otherwise
lead to strikes by firefighters or law enforcement officers.
Finally, the bill states that it is not the intent of the
Legislature that this title apply to any law enforcement
policy that pertains to how law enforcement officers interact
SB 402
Page 2
with members of the public or pertains to police community
relations.
3)Defines "scope of arbitration" for purposes of the bill as
limited to only those issues that are within the scope of
representation as defined in Government Code section 3504
(which includes all matters relating to employment conditions
and employer-employee relations, including but not limited to,
wages, hours, and other conditions of employment).
Additionally, the definition excludes from the scope of
arbitration any issue that is protected by what is commonly
referred to as the "management rights" clause of section 3504
(which specifies that the scope of representation shall not
include consideration of the merits, necessity, or
organization of any service or activity provided by law or
executive order).
4)Provides that if an impasse has been declared after the
representatives of an employer and firefighters or law
enforcement officers have exhausted their mutual efforts to
reach agreement over wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment within the scope or arbitration and
if the parties are unable to agree to the appointment of a
mediator, or the mediator appointed is unable to effect
settlement, the employee organization may request, in writing
to the employer, that their differences be submitted to an
arbitration panel.
5)Provides for a 3-member arbitration panel, with one member
chosen by each of the parties and the third (who serves as
Chair) picked by the first two members. If the parties are
unable to pick a third person, the mediator may serve as
chairperson. If the mediator is unable or unwilling to serve
as chairperson, the bill provides a process for choosing a
person to service as Chair culminating in the submission of an
odd-numbered list of names by either the American Arbitration
Association or the California State Mediation and Conciliation
Service. The list is then subjected to the striking of names
by both parties until only one name remains and that person is
appointed to serve as Chair.
6)Provides that if, during the dispute resolution process, any
employee willfully engages in a strike against the employer
that endangers public safety will be dismissed from employment
and may not be rehired except as a new employee.
SB 402
Page 3
7)Requires the arbitration panel to meet within 10 days of its
establishment, or any other period to which the parties agree,
to begin their investigation or to take any other action that
they deem appropriate.
8)Provides that the arbitration panel may administer oaths, and
subpoena both witnesses and any information relating to the
subject in dispute.
9)Requires that, five days prior to the beginning of the
arbitration panel hearings, parties must submit the last best
offer of settlement on those issues not previously agreed to
by the parties prior to arbitration.
10)Provides that the arbitration panel, within 30 days after
conclusion of the hearing, will decide the disputed issues by
selecting the last best offer package the most nearly complies
with certain factors specified in the bill.
11)Provides that the parties shall receive a copy of the
decision and have five days before the decision is made public
and binding to meet and attempt to resolve their differences
and, by mutual agreement, amend or modify the arbitration
panel's decision.
12)Provides that the provisions of this bill shall not apply to
city or county employer governed by a charter that was amended
prior to January 1, 2000, to incorporate local arbitration
provisions. (The Committee is advised that 19 charter cities,
one county and one city and county have opted to provide local
arbitration procedures.)
13)Provides that the costs of the arbitration proceeding and the
expenses of the arbitration panel (except for those of the
employer representative) will be borne by the employee
organization unless otherwise agreed to by the parties.
14)Specifies that the provisions of the bill will "sunset" as of
January 1, 2005.
15)Makes legislative findings and declarations that the duties
of local agency employer representatives under this bill are
substantially similar to the duties required under current law
and, therefore, the costs incurred by a local agency in
performing those duties are not reimbursable state-mandated
costs.
SB 402
Page 4
EXISTING LAW provides, under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, the
statutory framework for labor relations between all local public
employers and their employees and permits, but does not require,
the mediation of disputes between these parties.
Existing law also provides, under the Ralph C. Dills State
Employer-Employee Relations Act, the statutory framework for
labor relations between the State of California and its
employees and permits, but does not require, the arbitration of
disputes between these parties.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the author, "More than two dozen states
require arbitration as a means to resolve public employee
collective bargaining disputes, and arbitration has been used in
California cities since 1970. Currently, 21 local agencies
impose arbitration to assure that fair negotiations take place;
and these arbitration procedures have been 100% effective in
preventing firefighter and law enforcement officer strikes in
California. This bill provides a "final offer" arbitration
procedure for employers and public safety employees; and it is
initiated only after an impasse has been declared - where all
efforts to reach a collective bargaining agreement have
failed?Employer administered discipline and "community-oriented
policing" policies are specifically exempted from this bill.
The arbitration panel must limit its arbitration award to only
those issues that (1) were made as a proposal or
counter-proposal in bargaining; (2) have not been previously
agreed to in bargaining; and (3) do not infringe upon employer
managerial policy decision making. The arbitration panel must
choose the "last best offer" submitted by the two parties that
most nearly complies with the standards of fairness, which
assures that the award will not place a financial strain on the
public purse. This bill encourages both sides to be more
realistic and honest in their demands at the bargaining table.
This bill is a fair and peaceful way to resolve bargaining
disputes, while protecting the welfare of the public with tough
strike sanctions."
Cities in opposition argue that this bill mandates a system of
compulsory and binding arbitration for the resolution of
collective bargaining disputes/impasse for police and fire
employees. They contend that this bill would severely damage
local government's ability to fairly negotiate with public
SB 402
Page 5
safety bargaining units. Cities continue that they have long
opposed compulsory and binding arbitration as a means to settle
collective bargaining disputes, and that there is no
circumstance under which compulsory and binding arbitration is
acceptable as an impasse remedy. They state it disenfranchises
the voters from their elected officials by removing their budget
authority over police and fire services and giving it to an
outside arbitrator who is not accountable to the citizens.
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957
FN: 0003203