BILL ANALYSIS
SB 656
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 656 (DeSaulnier)
As Amended August 17, 2009
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :30-8
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 6-0 APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Hernandez, Furutani, |Ayes:|De Leon, Conway, Ammiano, |
| |Beall, Conway, Nestande, | | |
| |Torrico | |Charles Calderon, Coto, |
| | | |Davis, Duvall, Fuentes, |
| | | |Hall, Harkey, Miller, |
| | | |John A. Perez, Skinner, |
| | | |Solorio, |
| | | |Audra Strickland, |
| | | |Torlakson, Hill |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Provides that a local public agency bargaining unit
which is comprised of a majority of persons who are peace
officers will also be excluded from the jurisdiction of the
Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) for purposes of dispute
resolutions. Currently, only persons who are peace officers are
excluded from PERB jurisdiction.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, the Judicial Council has indicated that this bill
will not result in any increase in costs to the courts, and PERB
may experience very minor savings.
COMMENTS : PERB is a quasi-judicial administrative agency
charged with administering the collective bargaining statutes
covering employees of California's public schools, colleges, and
universities, employees of the State of California, employees of
California local public agencies (cities, counties and special
districts), trial court employees and supervisory employees of
the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
Currently, PERB has jurisdiction over unfair labor disputes of
all miscellaneous employees, however, pursuant to SB 739
SB 656
Page 2
(Solis), Chapter 910, Statutes of 2000, peace officers are
excluded from PERB and, therefore, are under the direct
jurisdiction of the courts. However, it has been noted that
there are certain bargaining units which are comprised of both
miscellaneous employees and employees with peace officer status,
and the existing statute is not clear as to the jurisdiction of
those employees' disputes. In those units, PERB has asserted
jurisdiction over cases that affected the entire unit, whereby,
an individual peace officer under a mixed bargaining unit may
file grievances directly with the California Supreme Courts.
In their sponsor letter, the Peace Officer's Research
Association of California states, "Currently, Government Code
Section 3511 exempts "persons who are peace officers as defined
in Section 830.1 of the Penal Code" from the jurisdiction of the
Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). The wording of this
statute is quite ambiguous and has caused much confusion
regarding authority over dispute resolution. Public employees,
whom are not peace officers, are required to go to PERB with
their labor disputes. Peace officers are exempted from this;
thereby requiring they go to the California Supreme Court for
resolution. A problem arises when a peace officer is a part of
a 'mixed unit', comprised of both peace officers and
miscellaneous employees (such as Dispatchers, Community Services
Officers and Crime Scene Investigators). It is unclear in the
writing of this law who would have jurisdiction over these
disputes. This creates substantial risk of jurisdiction being
challenged, either in PERB or the Superior Court. SB 656 seeks
to remedy the uncertainty of the statute by clarifying that
these mixed units, should the unit be comprised of a majority of
peace officers, will be excluded from PERB jurisdiction. This
will enable the disputes of these peace officers to remain in
the Superior Court, thereby ending the confusion. In addition,
by providing certainty as to jurisdiction, SB 656 will reduce
costs associated with challenging jurisdiction of mixed units."
In their letter of opposition, the California State Association
of Counties and the Regional Council of Rural Counties state,
"SB 656 seeks to exempt all employees in a mixed bargaining unit
from the jurisdiction of the Public Employment Relations Board
(PERB) if the bargaining unit includes a majority of peace
officers. Counties believe that it is inappropriate to extend
what is now a narrow exemption from PERB for peace officers to a
large group of miscellaneous employees. Counties do not see a
SB 656
Page 3
significant problem with the current structure where peace
officer members of a mixed bargaining unit resolve their
disputes in court while miscellaneous employees go before PERB.
If a problem exists in a particular bargaining unit, existing
law provides peace offices with the right to establish a
separate bargaining unit. SB 656 would treat all employees in
mixed bargaining units the same and we see no reason to do so.
In fact, this change could have the unintended result of having
similar bargaining units with a majority of peace officers."
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957
FN: 0002395