BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT & RETIREMENT BILL NO: AB 2032
Norma Torres, Chair HEARING DATE: June 9, 2014
AB 2032 (Bonta) as introduced 2/20/14 FISCAL: NO
STATE PERSONNEL BOARD APPEALS: BURDEN OF PROOF
HISTORY :
Sponsor: California Association of Highway Patrolmen
(CAHP)
CDF Firefighters, Co-Sponsor
Other legislation:AB 962 (Hall),
Chapter 682, Statutes of 2011
AB 1062 (Jones-Sawyer),
Chapter 427, Statutes of 2013
ASSEMBLY VOTES :
PER & SS 5-0 4/02/14
Assembly Floor 59-164/10/14
SUMMARY :
AB 2032 requires that the burden of proof to sustain a
disciplinary action, rather than switching to the appellant
employee, remains with the state employing agency in court
proceedings for a writ of mandate brought in superior court
if the State Personnel Board (SPB) has failed to render a
decision in the administrative hearing process within
existing statutorily required timeframes.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS :
1)Existing law :
a) establishes the SPB which is responsible for
administering a merit system of civil service employment
within California state government, and establishes
administrative procedures and time frames to resolve
appeals of alleged violations of civil service laws and
rules.
Glenn A. Miles
Date: May 22, 2014 Page
1
b) provides procedures whereby an employee may appeal a
disciplinary action or termination by an employer. In
such proceedings, the employer bears the burden of proof
that the disciplinary action or termination was
appropriate.
c) authorizes a state employee to make a written request
for a priority hearing by SPB for an appeal of a
disciplinary action that resulted in the employee's
termination if an evidentiary hearing has not commenced
within six months of the filing of the appeal.
d) allows a state employee, when SPB has failed to
render a timely decision, to file a writ of mandate in
superior court to overturn the disciplinary action or
termination; however, when the employee files the writ
of mandate, the burden of proof shifts to the employee
to prove that the employer acted improperly in
performing the disciplinary action or dismissal.
2)This bill requires that the burden of proof, if SPB fails
to act within specified statutorily required timeframes to
render a decision in an investigation or evidentiary
hearing of a disciplinary action resulting in termination
against a state employee, remains with the state employer
in proceedings for a writ of mandate brought by the
employee in superior court to appeal the termination.
COMMENTS :
1)Arguments in Support :
According to the sponsor,
When an employee is dismissed from state service, the
SPB is required to render a decision within six months
from the filing of an appeal. During these proceedings,
the burden of proof falls on the employing agency.
However, if the SPB fails to act within the allotted six
months, the employee may file a petition in superior
court. Under these circumstances, the burden of proof
then switches from the employing agency to the employee,
which forces the employee to prove that the action was
Glenn A. Miles
Date: May 22, 2014 Page
2
unwarranted.
Reversing the burden of proof when the SPB fails to act
in a timely manner unfairly penalizes the employee and
violates their fundamental due process rights guaranteed
by Skelly v. State Personnel Board. (1975) 15 Cal. 3d
194. AB 2032 modifies this unjust process and keeps the
burden of proof on the employing agency, if the case
goes to court, and if the SPB fails to act within its
statutory timeframe.
2)SUPPORT :
California Association of Highway Patrolmen (CAHP), Sponsor
CDF Firefighters, Co-Sponsor
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO
California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA)
California Professional Firefighters (CPF)
California School Employees Association (CSEA), AFL-CIO
California Statewide Law Enforcement Association (CSLEA)
Service Employees International Union (SEIU)
3)OPPOSITION :
None.
#####
Glenn A. Miles
Date: May 22, 2014 Page
3