BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 931
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 22, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL
SECURITY
Warren T. Furutani, Chair
SB 931 (Vargas) - As Amended: April 25, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 24-12
SUBJECT : Public employee organizations.
SUMMARY : Prohibits public agencies from using public funds to
pay external consultants or legal advisors to counsel the
employer on how to minimize or deter the exercise of guaranteed
public employee rights related to employer-employee relations,
and exempts certain payments, as specified. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Prohibits public agencies from using public funds to pay
external consultants or legal advisors to counsel the employer
on how to minimize or deter the exercise of guaranteed
employee rights under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA), the
Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act), the Educational Employment
Relations Act (EERA), and the Higher Education
Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA).
2)Exempts payments for representation of a public sector
employer before a court, administrative agency, or tribunal
for arbitration, or for engaging in collective bargaining on
behalf of the employer with respect to wages, hours, or other
terms and conditions of employment.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the MMBA which provides a statutory framework for
local government employer-employee relations.
2)Establishes the Dills Act which provides a statutory framework
for state employer-employee relations.
3)Establishes the EERA which provides a statutory framework for
public school employer-employee relations.
4)Establishes the HEERA which provides a statutory framework for
employer-employee relations at the University of California,
SB 931
Page 2
California State University, and Hastings College of Law.
5)Defines "recognized employee organization" as an employee
organization that has been formally acknowledged by a public
agency as an employee organization that represents employees
of the public agency.
6)Provides for negotiations between a state or local public
employer and representatives of recognized employee
organizations concerning wages, hours, and other terms and
conditions of employment.
7)Provide that public agencies and employee organizations must
not interfere with, intimidate, restrain, coerce or
discriminate against public employees because of an exercise
of their guaranteed statutory rights related to
employer-employee relations.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown.
COMMENTS : According to the author's office, "In the United
States, there exists a multi-billion dollar union-busting
industry, comprised of thousands of attorneys and consultants
specializing in training and counseling clients on effective
'union avoidance'. The same 'union avoidance' specialists are
often retained for legal services and representation for
employers in the realm of labor and employment law. Regardless
of how these firms receive payment and the exact category of
services contracted for, employees of state-funded agencies are
public employees and should not be subjected to employer
relations matters influenced by outside advisors specializing in
'union avoidance'."
According to the sponsor, the American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employees, "Public agencies should not use
scarce public funds to circumvent public employees' guaranteed
rights to a voice on the job. Public employees are harassed,
intimidated and threatened with unnecessarily antagonist legal
action for conducting themselves in a manner that is protected
by law. Public agencies such as the University of California
hire outside legal counsel who specialize in 'union avoidance'
to coach management on ways to circumvent worker rights. It is
vitally important during this time of economic hardship that all
public funds are handled responsibly and invested with the best
interest of the state in mind."
SB 931
Page 3
Opponents state, "Our organizations believe that SB 931 is an
unreasonable and impermissible interference with attorney-client
privilege and right to counsel. We are concerned that proposed
changes create serious impairments to two important rights to
public agencies...Our organizations believe that a public agency
is entitled to seek counsel, and freely communicate thoughts and
ideas with counsel, in order to best determine its rights and
obligations?Second, the proposed language in SB 931 is so vague
the only way to determine whether a communication would be
wrongful would be to require disclosure of the communication,
which would also violate the attorney-client privilege.
Additionally, the threat of disclosure would likely deter
employers from getting advice on issues that may fall in the
grey area, of which there are many."
Opponents further state, "Most public agency employers who
consult for sevices from an employment attorney are not seeking
to curtail employee rights or the right of its workers to
unionize. There are public agency employers who act in good
faith but do not have expertise on staff to deal with
negotiating with unions and as such are required to seek outside
counsel. In addition, many of the issues that a union is able
to negotiate on behalf of its members are matters which may bind
the public agency to a contract worth millions of dollars. We
believe it is inappropriate to expect the ratepayers of a water
agency to be held liable for contracts in which their best
interests were not taken into account."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees
(Sponsor)
California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union
California Conference of Machinists
California Federation of Teachers
California Labor Federation
California Nurses Association
California Teamsters Public Affairs Council
SB 931
Page 4
Communication Workers of America (CWA)
Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21
University Professional and Technical Employees, CWA, Local 9119
Opposition
Association of California Healthcare Districts
Association of California School Administrators
Association of California Water Agencies
California Association of Sanitation Agencies
California Association of Joint Powers Authorities
California County Superintendents Educational Services
Association
California Hospital Association
California Municipal Utilities Association
California School Boards Association
California Special Districts Association
California State Association of Counties
California State University (Unless Amended)
City of Burbank
City of San Luis Obispo
City of Turlock
Contra Costa County Superintendent of Schools
Fortuna Union Elementary School District
Humboldt County Office of Education
Inland Personnel Council
Irvine Unified School District
Kern County Superintendent of Schools
League of California Cities
Orange County Department of Education
Orange County Superintendents' Association
Regional Council of Rural Counties
Rio Dell Elementary School District
Riverside County School Superintendents' Association
Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
San Bernardino Community College District
San Bernardino County District Advocates for Better Schools
San Diego County Office of Education
Santa Clara County Office of Education
Savanna School District
School Employers Association of California
School Services of California
Sonoma County Superintendent of Schools
University of California
Analysis Prepared by : Karon Green / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
SB 931
Page 5
319-3957