BILL ANALYSIS
AB 553
Page 1
GOVERNOR'S VETO
AB 553 (Hernandez)
As Amended May 8, 2007
2/3 vote
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 4-2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |Hernandez, Mullin, | | |
| |Swanson, Torrico | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|Ayes:| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Jeffries, Anderson | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |46-32|(June 5, 2007) |SENATE: |22-15|(August 30, |
| | | | | |2007) |
| | | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Clarifies the Public Employment Relations Board's
(PERB) exclusive authority to determine, under the
Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA), whether to seek from a court of
competent jurisdiction injunctive relief involving relations
between an employee organization and a public agency.
EXISTING LAW transfers, from the Superior Court to PERB, the
exclusive jurisdiction for resolving disputes and enforcing the
statutory duties and rights of local public agency employers and
employees covered under MMBA. [SB 739 (Solis), Chapter 901,
Statutes of 2000]
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
AB 553
Page 2
COMMENTS : According to information provided by PERB, "The PERB
is a quasi-judicial agency which oversees public sector
collective bargaining in California. PERB administers seven
collective bargaining statutes, ensures their consistent
implementation and application, and adjudicates disputes between
the parties subject to them. The statutes administered by PERB
include the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) of 1976
establishing collective bargaining in California's public
schools (K-12) and community colleges; the State
Employer-Employee Relations Act of 1978, known as the Ralph C.
Dills Act (Dills Act), establishing collective bargaining for
state government employees; and the Higher Education
Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA) of 1979 extending the
same coverage to the California State University System, the
University of California System and Hastings College of Law. The
MMBA of 1968 establishing collective bargaining for California's
municipal, county, and local special district employers and
employees was brought under PERB's jurisdiction pursuant to
Senate Bill 739 [Solis] (Chapter 901, Statutes of 2000),
effective July 1, 2001. PERB's jurisdiction over the MMBA
excludes peace officers, management employees and the City and
County of Los Angeles. In addition, PERB is responsible for the
administration of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority Transit Employer-Employee Relations Act
(TEERA), covering supervisory employees of the transit agency.
In addition, effective August 16, 2004, pursuant to Senate Bill
1102 [Budget & Fiscal Review Committee] (Chapter 227, Statutes
of 2004), the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance
Act (Trial Court Act) and the Trial Court Interpreter Employment
and Labor Relations Act (Court Interpreter Act) were brought
under PERB's jurisdiction."
According to supporters, "The point of creating the PERB and
giving it the exclusive jurisdiction it has over activities
within California's public employment labor relations laws it to
bring expertise and uniformity to labor relations, including
strikes. Superior Courts are ill-suited to this mission, they
rarely deal with labor relations issues and when they do in
strike situations are faced with emergency requests and have
little time to learn the field. The PERB, which has an
AB 553
Page 3
institutional memory and practice in dealing with difficult
labor issues, is much better suited to make quick decisions
about strikes."
Supporters go on to state, "There is currently confusion and
uncertainty by some over the jurisdictional issue. There have
been some courts which have issued injunctions against strike
activity at the request of local agency employers despite the
laws passed by the Legislature and even though the employer is
required to first go to PERB and the PERB is supposed to decide
based on law and their expertise whether to seek injunctive
relief over a strike?AB 553 does not change the law, but simply
clarifies what the Legislature already did and intended in
enacting
SB 739 in 2000."
Opponents argue, "This bill seeks to: expand PERB authority
into areas in which it has not existing authority or expertise;
directly preempt existing litigation; usurp city and county
authority over matters involving public health and safety; and
add unacceptable delays to seeking injunctive relief to protect
the public health and safety."
Opponents state, "AB 553 seeks legislative preemption in
litigation currently before three California District Courts of
Appeals involving: the City of San Jose (6th District), and
Counties of Contra Costa (First District) and Sacramento (3rd
District); litigation is pending appeal involving the County of
Mendocino?Cities and counties have broad common law and
statutory authority over issues of public health and safety
including: fire, police, psychiatric emergency services,
airport operations, detention services, child protective
services, waste water operations, landfill operations and
others. PERB has no such authority or expertise. The issues
presented for injunctive relief involve the issue of public
health and safety, not issues related to purported violations of
the MMBA. Requiring approval of the PERB usurps county and city
authority over matters relating to public health and safety."
GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE :
AB 553
Page 4
This bill would provide the Public Employment
Relations Board (PERB) with exclusive authority to
determine whether public health and safety would be at
risk in strike or lockout situations. Doing so would
add an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy and
potentially place the public at risk.
Cities and counties have common law and statutory
authority over matters of public health and safety.
When local governments seek injunctive relief from a
strike, they are doing so because of a potential
threat to the public health and safety of citizens.
It is therefore imperative that local governments have
access to immediate injunctive relief from superior
courts during strike situations. As the courts are
sufficiently suited to address matters of public
health and safety, there is no reason to force
decisions on injunctive relief into the slower PERB
process.
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957 FN:
0003579