BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 646
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 18, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 646 (Atkins) - As Amended: May 11, 2011
Policy Committee: PERS Vote:4-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill allows local public employee organizations to request
fact finding if a mediator is unable to reach a settlement
within 15 days of appointment. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires the fact-finding panel shall meet with the parties
within 10 days after appointment and take other steps it deems
appropriate. Specifies that the fact-finding panel consist of
one member selected by each party and a chairperson selected
by Public Employees Relations Board (PERB) or by agreement of
the parties.
2)Authorizes the fact-finding panel to make inquiries and
investigations, hold hearings, and take any other steps it
deems appropriate, and to issue subpoenas requiring the
attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of
witnesses.
3)Requires state and local public agencies, if requested by the
panel, to furnish the panel with all records, papers and
information in their possession relating to any matter under
investigation by the panel.
4)Specifies the criteria the fact-finding panel should be guided
by in arriving at their finding and recommendations.
5)Requires the fact-finding panel to make findings of fact and
recommend terms of a settlement if the dispute is not settled
within 30 days. This information must first be provided to
the parties before being made available to the public.
6)Requires the costs of the chairperson of the fact-finding
AB 646
Page 2
panel to be paid for by both parties whether or not PERB
selected the chairperson. Any other costs incurred will be
borne equally by the parties, as specified.
7)Allows an employer to implement their last, best and final
offer once any applicable mediation and fact-finding
procedures have been exhausted and despite the implementation
of the best and final offer, allows a recognized employee
organization the right each year to meet and confer.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Based on the staffing that PERB estimated was necessary to
administer the bill, the fiscal impact of administering the
provisions of this bill is approximately $200,000.
2)Though the bill is not keyed a local mandate, there could be
substantial state mandated reimbursement of local costs. The
amount would depend on the number of requests for fact
finding. PERB staff raised the possibility of exceeding 100
cases annually in the first years of the program. Assuming an
individual case is likely to cost around $5,000, with the
local agency footing half the bill, reimbursable costs could
exceed $2.5 million. The Commission on State Mandates has
approved a test claim for any local government subject to the
jurisdiction of PERB that incurs increased costs as a result
of a mandate, meaning their costs are eligible for
reimbursement.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, "Currently, there is no
requirement that public agency employers and employee
organizations engage in impasse procedures where efforts to
negotiate a collective bargaining agreement have failed.
Without impasse procedures, negotiations may not be fully
effective, and bargaining may break down before all avenues
for agreement are explored. Many municipalities and public
agencies promulgate local rules which include impasse rules
and procedures. However, this requirement is not uniform, and
the lack of uniformity may serve to create confusion and
uncertainty.
"The creation of mandatory impasse procedures is likely to
increase the effectiveness of the collective bargaining
AB 646
Page 3
process, by enabling the parties to employ mediation and
fact-finding in order to assist them in resolving differences
that remain after negotiations have been unsuccessful.
Mediators are often useful in restarting stalled negotiations,
by encouraging dialogue where talks have broken down;
identifying potential areas where agreement may be reached;
diffusing tension; and suggesting creative compromise
proposals. Fact-finding panels can also help facilitate
agreement, by making objective, factual determinations that
can help the parties engage in productive discussions and
reach reasonable decisions."
2)Background. The Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) governs
labor-management relations and collective bargaining in
California local government, including cities. The California
Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) is the administrative
agency charged with administering the MMBA. MMBA contains
various provisions intended to promote full communication
between public employers and their employees by providing a
reasonable method of resolving disputes regarding wages, hours
and other terms and conditions of employment between public
employers and public employee organizations.
It also provides that if representatives of the public agency
and the employee organization fail to reach agreement, the two
parties may mutually agree on the appointment of a mediator
and equally share the cost. If the parties reach impasse, the
public agency is not required to proceed to interest
arbitration and may implement its last, best and final offer.
MMBA also delegates jurisdiction over the employer-employee
relationship to the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB)
and charges PERB with resolving disputes and enforcing the
statutory duties and rights of local public agency employers
and employee organizations.
3)Opposition. The opponents, local governments and
associations, argue that AB 646 undermines a local agency's
authority to establish local rules for resolving impasse and
the requirement that a local agency engage in fact-finding may
delay rather than speed the conclusion of contract
negotiations. Opponents state they are not aware of any
abuses or short-comings of the current process and question
the need for making such an important change in the process of
reaching a collective bargaining agreement.
AB 646
Page 4
Opponents conclude that besides the delay, the bill could
result in additional costs to public employers at a time when
public agencies are struggling to address budget shortfalls
and maintain basic services for their residents. They argue
that AB 646 would provide a disincentive for employee
organizations to negotiate in good faith when there is the
option of further processes under the PERB that will prolong
negotiations. Most collectively bargained contracts are
stalled due to cost-saving measures being sought by the public
agency in a downturned economy; requiring mediation and
fact-finding prior to imposing a last, best and final offer
would simply add costs and be unhelpful to both the employer
and the employees.
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081