BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1606
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 1606 (Perea)
As Introduced February 7, 2012
Majority vote
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 4-1 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Furutani, Allen, Ma, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Wieckowski | |Bradford, Charles |
| | | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| | | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Mansoor |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| | | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Clarifies impasse procedures governing local public
agencies and employee organizations. Specifically, this bill ,
authorizes the employee organization to request that the
parties' differences 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 if the
dispute was not submitted to mediation within 30 days after the
date that either party provided the other with written notice of
a declaration of impasse.
EXISTING LAW , as established by the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act
(MMBA):
1)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.
2)Allows, as established by AB 646 (Atkins), Chapter 680,
Statutes of 2011, local public employee organizations to
request fact-finding if a mediator is unable to reach a
settlement within 30 days of appointment.
3)Allows an employer to implement their last, best and final
AB 1606
Page 2
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.
4)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.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, "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.
.
COMMENTS : 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.
In fact, several local government employers argue that AB 646
does not require fact-finding if the parties do not engage in
mediation.
"Last December, PERB adopted emergency regulations to implement
the provisions of AB 646. The adopted regulations provide that,
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. In cases
where a dispute is not submitted to a mediator, the request for
fact-finding must occur within 30 days following the date that
either party provided the other with written notice of
declaration of impasse.
"However, the issue whether AB 646 requires that mediation occur
as a precondition to an employee organization's ability to
request fact-finding remains unresolved. AB 1606 would clarify
that fact-finding is available to employee organizations in all
AB 1606
Page 3
situations, regardless of whether the employer and employee have
engaged in mediation."
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 factfinding. Numerous
employers and employee organizations provided public comments on
the issue. The majority of interested parties, both employer
and labor representatives, urged a reading of AB 646 that
provides for a factfinding request whether mediation occurs or
not. In December 2011, PERB adopted emergency regulations that
implemented the majority opinion, allowing factfinding to be
requested in all circumstances, because they found it to be the
most efficient way to implement the entirety of AB 646 and
accurately reflect the intent of the Legislature.
"AB 1606 seeks to provide a final, statutory clarification of
this question, by revising the Government Code to allow
factfinding in all circumstances in which a local public
employer and its employees have reached an impasse in their
negotiations. AB 1606 properly reflects the intent of the
Legislature to strengthen collective bargaining by ensuring
employers and employees operate in good faith and work
collaboratively to deliver government services in a fair,
cost-efficient manner."
Opponents state, "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.
"This bill would be applicable to both formal contract
negotiations and any Meet and Confer process involving changes
to departmental operations that have an impact to the wages,
hours or working conditions of employees. The fact finding
panel would be required to consider, weigh, and be guided by the
criteria outlines in arriving at their findings and
AB 1606
Page 4
recommendations. The broad criteria allows for the panel to
consider factors normally not considered by the County as being
relevant to operations. The costs of this process or revenue
impacts are unknown at this time. However, many County
agencies/departments implement operational changes to gain
efficiencies and/or lower costs that require a Meet and Confer
process to address impacts to employees. This bill could
significantly impact the proposed changes which could be
implemented."
On December 8, 2011, PERB approved amendments to three
regulation sections and the adoption of two new regulation
sections as emergency regulations necessary for the
implementation of the provisions of AB 646. The emergency
rulemaking package was submitted to the Office of Administrative
Law (OAL) on December 19, 2011. On December 29, 2011, OAL
approved the emergency regulatory action, effective on January
1, 2012. Below is the relevant excerpt from those new
regulations:
32802. Request for Factfinding Under the MMBA.
(a) An exclusive representative may request that
the parties' differences be submitted to a
factfinding panel. The request shall be
accompanied by a statement that the parties have
been unable to effect a settlement. Such a request
may be filed:
(1) Not sooner than 30 days, but not more than 45
days, following the appointment or selection of a
mediator pursuant either to the parties' agreement
to mediate or a mediation process required by a
public agency's local rules; or
(2) If the dispute was not submitted to mediation,
not later than 30 days following the date that
either party provided the other with written
notice of a declaration of impasse.
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957
AB 1606
Page 5
FN: 0003307