BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1606
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 18, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 1606 (Perea) - As Introduced: February 7, 2012
Policy Committee: PERSSVote:4-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes an employee organization to request that
the differences between the organization and employer be
submitted to a fact-finding panel, if the parties are unable to
effect settlement of the controversy within 30 days after the
appointment of a mediator or 30 days after either party provides
the other a written notice of a declaration of impasse.
FISCAL EFFECT
Since this bill is meant to be declarative of existing law and
mirrors existing regulations, there is no direct fiscal impact.
However, the regulations in question are emergency regulations
and PERB is in the process of developing the final regulations.
If fact-finding were to be limited either through a different
interpretation of AB 646 and/or the final regulations were to
differ markedly, this bill could result in increased costs to
PERB of approximately $50,000 and a possible reimbursement of
state mandated local costs.
AB 646 (Atkins), Chapter 680, Statutes of 2011, allowed local
public employee organizations to request fact-finding if a
mediator is unable to reach a settlement within 30 days of
appointment.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale. According to the author, ambiguity in the drafting
of AB 646 has called into question whether an employer can
forgo all impasse procedures, including mediation and
fact-finding. Several local governments argue that AB 646 does
AB 1606
Page 2
not require fact-finding if the parties do not engage in
mediation. The author notes PERB adopted emergency
regulations to implement AB 646 and the regulations provide if
the parties opt to mediate, a fact-finding request can be
filed not sooner than 30 days, but not more than 45 days,
following the appointment or selection of a mediator. The
regulations also provide in cases where a dispute is not
submitted to a mediator, the request for fact-finding must
occur within 30 days.
However, the author argues that whether AB 646 requires that
mediation is a necessary precondition to request fact-finding
remains unresolved. The author states that AB 1606 would
clarify that fact-finding is available to employee
organizations in all situations, regardless of whether the
employer and employee have engaged in mediation.
2)Background. In December 2011, PERB adopted emergency
regulations allowing fact-finding to be requested in all
circumstances, because the board found it to be the most
efficient way to implement the entirety of AB 646 and
accurately reflect the intent of the Legislature. The Office
of Administrative Law approved the emergency regulatory
action, effective on January 1, 2012.
During the PERB rulemaking process, it became apparent that AB
646 was drafted in a manner that called into question whether
mediation was a precondition to an employee organization's
ability to request fact-finding. The emergency regulations
allow employee organizations to request fact-finding,
regardless if mediation has occurred. PERB adopted this
interpretation for the regulations to eliminate any
uncertainty for employees and employers about when
fact-finding could be requested.
3)Support. Supporters state during the PERB rulemaking process,
it became apparent that AB 646 was drafted in a manner that
called into question whether mediation was a precondition to
an employee organization's ability to request fact-finding.
Supporters conclude that numerous employers and employee
organizations provided public comments on the issue and the
majority of interested parties, both employer and labor
representatives, urged a reading of AB 646 that provides for a
fact-finding request whether mediation occurs or not.
AB 1606
Page 3
4)Opposition. The County of Orange, states, "While it is
indicated that this bill is intended to be technical and
clarifying of existing law, the language states that the panel
shall consider different items when reaching their decision.
It is believed these factors take more and more discretion
away from the Board (i.e., the financial ability of the public
agency, consumer price index, etc.) and puts it into the hands
of the fact finding panel. While it is not mentioned in the
bill's text, the decision of the fact finding panel will be
made public so it could also have political implications.
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081