AB 2065, as amended, Melendez. California Whistleblower Protection Act: Legislature: employees.
The California Whistleblower Protection Act prohibits an employee from using his or her official authority or influence for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, or commanding any person for the purpose of interfering with his or her right to make a protected disclosure of improper governmental activity. “Employee” is defined to include specified employees in the executive and judicial branches of state government. The act requires the State Auditor to investigate and report on improper governmental activities, as specified. The act authorizes an employee or applicant for employment who files a written complaint alleging reprisal, retaliation, or similar prohibited acts to also file a copy of the written complaint with the State Personnel Board, together with a sworn statement that the complaint is true, under penalty of perjury. The act provides that any person who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, or similar prohibited acts against a state employee or applicant for state employment for having made a protected disclosure, is subject to punishment for a misdemeanor, and shall be liable in an action for civil damages brought by the injured party.
This bill would make these provisions of the act applicable to the Legislature, except for procedures regarding notices of adverse action and the State Personnel Board and except that penalties would not apply to the extent that a Member of the Legislature is immune from liability under the doctrine of legislative immunity. The bill would authorize an employee of the Legislature or an applicant for employment with the Legislature to file a written complaint with his or her supervisor, manager, or other officer designated by the Committee on Rules of the Assembly or Senate, as applicable, alleging improper acts, together with a sworn statement that the complaint is true, under penalty of perjury, within one year of the most recent improper act complained about. The bill would require the Committees on Rules of the Assembly and Senate to each designate an officer to receive these written complaints. By expanding the scope of crimes under the act, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Section 8547.2 of the Government Code is
2amended to read:
For the purposes of this article, the following terms
4have the following meanings:
5(a) (1) “Employee” means any of the following:
6 (A) An individual appointed by the Governor.
7(B) An individual employed or holding office in a state agency
8as defined by Section 11000, including, for purposes of Sections
98547.3 to 8547.7, inclusive, an employee of the California State
10University.
11(C) A Member or employee of the Legislature for purposes of
12Sections 8547.3 to 8547.7, inclusive, except for those provisions
P3 1of
Section 8547.4 concerningbegin delete noticesend deletebegin insert noticeend insert of adverse action and
2the State Personnel Board.
3(D) An individual appointed by the Legislature to a state board
4orbegin delete commission.end deletebegin insert commission.end insert
5 (E) A person employed by the Supreme Court, a court of appeal,
6a superior court, or the Administrative Office of the Courts for the
7purposes of Sections 8547.3 to 8547.7, inclusive, and Section
88547.13, except for those provisions of Section 8547.4
concerning
9notice of adverse action and the State Personnel Board.
10(2) Forbegin delete purposeend deletebegin insert
purposesend insert of this subdivision, “employee”
11includes a former employee who met the criteria of this subdivision
12during his or her employment.
13(b) “Illegal order” means a directive to violate or assist in
14violating a federal, state, or local law, rule, or regulation, or an
15order to work or cause others to work in conditions outside of their
16line of duty that would unreasonably threaten the health or safety
17of employees or the public.
18(c) “Improper governmental activity” means an activity by a
19state agency or by an employee that is undertaken in the
20performance of the employee’s duties, undertaken inside a state
21office, or, if undertaken outside a state office by the employee,
22directly relates to state government, whether or not that activity
is
23within the scope of his or her employment, and that (1) is in
24violation of any state or federal law or regulation, including, but
25not limited to, corruption, malfeasance, bribery, theft of
26government property, fraudulent claims, fraud, coercion,
27conversion, malicious prosecution, misuse of government property,
28or willful omission to perform duty, (2) is in violation of an
29Executive order of the Governor, a California Rule of Court, or
30any policy or procedure mandated by the State Administrative
31Manual or State Contracting Manual, or (3) is economically
32wasteful, involves gross misconduct, incompetency, or inefficiency.
33For purposes of Sections 8547.4, 8547.5, 8547.7, 8547.10, and
348547.11, “improper governmental activity” includes any activity
35by the University of California or by an employee, including an
36officer or faculty member, who otherwise meets the criteria of this
37subdivision. For
purposes of Sections 8547.4, 8547.5, and 8547.13,
38“improper governmental activity” includes any activity by the
39Supreme Court, a court of appeal, a superior court, or the
40Administrative Office of the Courts, or by an employee thereof,
P4 1who otherwise meets the criteria of this subdivision. For purposes
2of Sections 8547.4, 8547.5, 8547.7, and 8547.14, “improper
3governmental activity” includes any activity by the Legislature or
4by an employee thereof who otherwise meets the criteria of this
5subdivision.
6(d) “Person” means an individual, corporation, trust, association,
7a state or local government, or an agency or instrumentality of any
8of the foregoing.
9(e) “Protected disclosure” means a good faith communication,
10including a communication based on, or when carrying out, job
11duties,
that discloses or demonstrates an intention to disclose
12information that may evidence (1) an improper governmental
13activity, or (2) a condition that may significantly threaten the health
14or safety of employees or the public if the disclosure or intention
15to disclose was made for the purpose of remedying that condition.
16Protected disclosure specifically includes a good faith
17communication to the California State Auditor’s Office alleging
18an improper governmental activity and any evidence delivered to
19the California State Auditor’s Office in support of the allegation.
20“Protected disclosure” also includes, but is not limited to, a
21complaint made to the Commission on Judicial Performance.
22(f) “State agency” is defined by Section 11000. “State agency”
23includes the University of California for purposes of Sections
248547.5 to 8547.7, inclusive,
and the California State University
25for purposes of Sections 8547.3 to 8547.7, inclusive. Sections
268547.3 to 8547.7, inclusive, shall apply to the Supreme Court, the
27courts of appeal, the superior courts, the Administrative Office of
28the Courts, and the Legislature in the same manner as they apply
29to a state agency.
Section 8547.3 of the Government Code is amended
31to read:
(a) An employee may not directly or indirectly use or
33attempt to use the official authority or influence of the employee
34for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding,
35or attempting to intimidate, threaten, coerce, or command any
36person for the purpose of interfering with the rights conferred
37pursuant to this article.
38(b) For the purpose of subdivision (a), “use of official authority
39or influence” includes promising to confer, or conferring, any
40benefit; effecting, or threatening to effect, any reprisal; or taking,
P5 1or directing others to take, or recommending, processing, or
2approving, any personnel action, including, but not
limited to,
3appointment, promotion, transfer, assignment, performance
4
evaluation, suspension, or other disciplinary action.
5(c) Any employee who violates subdivision (a) may be liable
6in an action for civil damages brought against the employee by
7the offended party, except to the extent that a Member of the
8Legislature is immune from liability under the doctrine of
9legislative immunity.begin insert For purposes of this section, a Member of
10the Legislature is not an offended party who may bring an action
11for damages if the employee who violates subdivision (a) is a
12Member or an employee of the Legislature.end insert
13(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize an
14individual to disclose information otherwise prohibited by or under
15law.
Section 8547.14 is added to the Government Code, to
17read:
(a) An employee of the Legislature or applicant for
19employment with the Legislature may file a written complaint with
20his or her supervisor, manager, or other officer designated for that
21purpose by the Committee on Rules of the Assembly or Senate,
22as applicable, alleging actual or attempted acts of reprisal,
23retaliation, threats, coercion, or similar improper acts prohibited
24by Section 8547.3, together with a sworn statement that the
25contents of the written complaint are true, or are believed by the
26affiant to be true, under penalty of perjury. The complaint shall be
27filed within one year of the most recent improper act complained
28about. The Committees on Rules of the Assembly and Senate shall
29each designate an officer to
receive written complaints for purposes
30of this subdivision.
31(b) Except to the extent that a Member of the Legislature is
32immune from liability under the doctrine of legislative immunity,
33any person who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation,
34threats, coercion, or similar improper acts against an employee of
35the Legislature or applicant for employment with the Legislature
36for having made a protected disclosure, is subject to a fine not to
37exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) and imprisonment inbegin delete theend deletebegin insert aend insert
38 county jail for a period not to exceed one year.
39(c) In addition to all other penalties
provided by law, except to
40the extent that a Member of the Legislature is immune from
P6 1liability under the doctrine of legislative immunity, any person
2who intentionally engages in acts of reprisal, retaliation, threats,
3coercion, or similar acts against a state employee or applicant for
4state employment for having made a protected disclosure shall be
5liable in an action for damages brought against him or her by the
6injured party. Punitive damages may be awarded by the court
7where the acts of the offending party are proven to be malicious.
8Where liability has been established, the injured party shall also
9be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by law.
10(d) This section does not prevent a supervisor, manager, or other
11officer of the Legislature from taking, directing others to take,
12recommending, or approving any personnel action
or from taking
13or failing to take a personnel action with respect to any employee
14of the Legislature or applicant for employment with the Legislature
15if the supervisor, manager, or other officer reasonably believes
16any action or inaction is justified on the basis of evidence separate
17and apart from the fact that the person has made a protected
18disclosure.
19(e) In any civil action, once it has been demonstrated by a
20preponderance of evidence that an activity protected by this article
21was a contributing factor in the alleged retaliation against a former,
22current, or prospective employee, the burden of proof shall be on
23the supervisor, manager, or other officer of the Legislature to
24demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged
25action would have occurred for legitimate, independent reasons
26even if the employee had not
engaged in protected disclosures or
27refused an illegal order.
28(f) This article does not diminish the rights, privileges, or
29remedies of any employee under any other federal or state law.
No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
31Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
32the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school
33district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime or
34infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty
35for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of
36the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within
37the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
38Constitution.
O
97