Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, and excluded employees, as specified. The bill would grant the Judicial Council the sole authority to designate state employee positions as excluded positions and would prohibit exempted managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions from exceeding ¹/₃ of the total authorized Judicial Council positions as stated in the Department of Finance Salaries and Wages Supplement. The bill would prohibit review of the designation of excluded positions by the Public Employment Relations Board. The bill would also except from the definition of employee a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. The bill would define the employer, for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees. supervisory employees, and excluded employees, as specified. The bill would provide that grant the Judicial Council has the sole authority to designate state employee positions and confidential as excluded positions and would prohibit exempted managerial, supervisory, and confidential confidential, and excluded positions from exceeding ¹/₃ of the total permanent full-time Judicial Council employees. authorized Judicial Council positions as stated in the Department of Finance Salaries and Wages Supplement. The bill would prohibit review of the designation of excluded positions by the Public Employment Relations Board. The bill would also except from this the definition of employee a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. The bill would define the employer, for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law excludes certain employees from coverage under the Dills Act, including, among others, managerial employees, supervisory employees, and confidential employees, as defined. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees. The bill would provide that the Judicial Council has the authority to designate state employee positions and confidential positions and would prohibit exempted managerial, supervisory, and confidential positions from exceeding ¹/₃ of the total permanent full-time Judicial Council employees. The bill would also except from this definition a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center, as well as employees working under the supervision of the Office of Governmental Affairs or the Human Resources Services Office. Center. The bill would define the employer, for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees. The bill would also except from this definition a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. Center, as well as employees working under the supervision of the Office of Governmental Affairs or the Human Resources Services Office. The bill would define the employer, for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law creates the Public Employment Relations Board and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees. The bill would also except from this definition a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. The bill would define the employer for these employer, for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

Existing law, the Dills Act, governs collective bargaining between public employers the state and recognized state public employee organizations. Existing law generally delegates jurisdiction to creates the Public Employment Relations Board to resolve disputes and enforce the statutory duties and rights of state, local, and public school employers and employees. and authorizes it, among other things, to determine appropriate state employee bargaining units, as specified. The California Constitution prescribes the membership of the California Supreme Court and requires the Legislature to create appellate court districts, all of which are vested with the judicial power of the state. The California Constitution prescribes the membership and duties of the Judicial Council and authorizes the council to appoint an Administrative Director of the Courts. Existing law creates the Habeas Corpus Resource Center for the purpose of providing representation to people who are convicted and sentenced to death in this state and who are without counsel.

This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation relating to collective bargaining. apply the Dills Act to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to specified exceptions. The bill would define an employee for these purposes as any employee of the Judicial Council, except managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees. The bill would also except from this definition a judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center. The bill would define the employer for these purposes as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council. The bill would provide that references in the Dills Act to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designated representative, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts. The bill would prohibit the Public Employment Relations Board from including Judicial Council employees in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of Judicial Council.

Existing law governs collective bargaining between public employers and recognized employee organizations. Existing law generally delegates jurisdiction to the Public Employment Relations Board to resolve disputes and enforce the statutory duties and rights of state, local, and public school employers and employees.

This bill would declare the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation relating to collective bargaining.

GOVERNOR'S VETO

GV Bill Id:AB 874

Author:(Santiago)

As Enrolled Ver:August 31, 2016

2/3 vote

Original Committee Reference: P.E.,R., & S.S.

SUMMARY: Makes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified employees of the Judicial Council. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that the Dills Act applies to employees of the Judicial Council, as specified.
2. Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial Council except for managerial, supervisory, or confidential employees, as specified.
3. Excludes from the definition of "state employee" any judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.
4. Designates the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designee, acting with the chairperson of the Judicial Council's authorization, as the "employer" for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith.
5. Specifies that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representative, acting with the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
6. Specifically excludes certain provisions of the Dills Act governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of Understanding from applying to the Judicial Council and its employees.
7. Prohibits the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), when determining appropriate bargaining units for these employees, from including them in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than Judicial Council employees.
8. Provides that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council positions, as specified.
9. Specifies that designation of excluded positions by the Judicial Council is subject to review by PERB.

The Senate amendments:

1. Change the author of the bill to Assemblymember Santiago.
2. Provide that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council positions, as specified.
3. Specify that designation of excluded positions by the Judicial Council is subject to review by PERB.
4. Make other technical and clarifying changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. The California Constitution:
   1. Establishes the Judicial Council which has constitutional responsibility to survey judicial business; study the operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the Governor, and the Legislature.
   2. Exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof.
2. State law:
   1. Provides collective bargaining for state employees of the executive branch under the Dills Act which establishes a process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment for represented employees. Managers and confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.
   2. Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
   3. Establishes PERB, a quasi-judicial administrative agency, to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering public employees including school, college, state, local agency, and trial court employees.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, "Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions. To the extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in unknown increased ongoing employment costs."

COMMENTS: According to the author, "Judicial Council state employees are currently not represented by a union but would like to be. As the law stands currently, the Dills Act does not apply to Judicial Council employees. Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees, because they are specifically exempted from civil service by Article 7 of the California State Constitution. However, the Dills Act or the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees.

"Trial court employees are already represented by SEIU pursuant to the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA). Judicial Council employees have requested that SEIU Local 1000 represent them in bargaining on the terms and conditions of employment.

"SEIU Local 1000 believes that it can represent Judicial Council employees under the current MMBA statute. However, the applicability of the current MMBA statute to Judicial Council employees can only be confirmed by going through a PERB representation petition process. This process includes a representation petition being submitted to PERB with the appropriate number of authorizing employee signatures, and an administrative hearing on the merits of the petition.

"In the event that PERB determines the MMBA, as currently drafted, is inapplicable to Judicial Council employees, the proposed bill serves to clarify that Judicial Council employees can be represented by a union."

Based on information provided to the Committee by the Judicial Council, there are approximately 575 non-managerial/non-supervisorial employees that could be impacted by this bill.

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

This bill allows certain Judicial Council employees to collectively bargain under the Ralph C. Dills Act.

The state has no experience collective bargaining with employees from the third branch of government. This bill leaves several important questions unanswered such as how agreements will be ratified, approved for funding and whether the Dills Act is a proper law for employees who are constitutionally exempt from civil service. This bill isn't ready to become law.

Analysis Prepared by: Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957 FN: 0005116

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 874

Author:(Santiago)

As Amended Ver:August 15, 2016

Majority vote

Original Committee Reference: P.E.,R., & S.S.

SUMMARY: Makes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified employees of the Judicial Council. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that the Dills Act applies to employees of the Judicial Council, as specified.
2. Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial Council except for managerial, supervisory, or confidential employees, as specified.
3. Excludes from the definition of "state employee" any judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.
4. Designates the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designee, acting with the chairperson of the Judicial Council's authorization, as the "employer" for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith.
5. Specifies that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representative, acting with the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
6. Specifically excludes certain provisions of the Dills Act governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of Understanding from applying to the Judicial Council and its employees.
7. Prohibits the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), when determining appropriate bargaining units for these employees, from including them in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than Judicial Council employees.
8. Provides that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council positions, as specified.
9. Specifies that designation of excluded positions by the Judicial Council is subject to review by PERB.

The Senate amendments:

1. Change the author of the bill to Assemblymember Santiago.
2. Provide that the Judicial Council has the sole authority and discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions not included in bargaining units do not exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council positions, as specified.
3. Specify that designation of excluded positions by the Judicial Council is subject to review by PERB.
4. Make other technical and clarifying changes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. The California Constitution:
   1. Establishes the Judicial Council which has constitutional responsibility to survey judicial business; study the operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the Governor, and the Legislature.
   2. Exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof.
2. State law:
   1. Provides collective bargaining for state employees of the executive branch under the Dills Act which establishes a process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment for represented employees. Managers and confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.
   2. Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
   3. Establishes PERB, a quasi-judicial administrative agency, to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering public employees including school, college, state, local agency, and trial court employees.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, "Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions. To the extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in unknown increased ongoing employment costs."

COMMENTS: According to the author, "Judicial Council state employees are currently not represented by a union but would like to be. As the law stands currently, the Dills Act does not apply to Judicial Council employees. Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees, because they are specifically exempted from civil service by Article 7 of the California State Constitution. However, the Dills Act or the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees.

"Trial court employees are already represented by SEIU pursuant to the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA). Judicial Council employees have requested that SEIU Local 1000 represent them in bargaining on the terms and conditions of employment.

"SEIU Local 1000 believes that it can represent Judicial Council employees under the current MMBA statute. However, the applicability of the current MMBA statute to Judicial Council employees can only be confirmed by going through a PERB representation petition process. This process includes a representation petition being submitted to PERB with the appropriate number of authorizing employee signatures, and an administrative hearing on the merits of the petition.

"In the event that PERB determines the MMBA, as currently drafted, is inapplicable to Judicial Council employees, the proposed bill serves to clarify that Judicial Council employees can be represented by a union."

Based on information provided to the Committee by the Judicial Council, there are approximately 575 non-managerial/non-supervisorial employees that could be impacted by this bill.

Analysis Prepared by: Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957 FN: 0004204

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 874

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE PUBLIC EMP. & RET. COMMITTEE: 3-2, 4/25/16

AYES: Pan, Beall, Hall

NOES: Morrell, Moorlach

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: 5-2, 6/21/16

AYES: Jackson, Hertzberg, Leno, Monning, Wieckowski

NOES: Moorlach, Anderson

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 5-2, 8/11/16

AYES: Lara, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza

NOES: Bates, Nielsen

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 52-25, 6/2/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Service Employees International Union, Local 1000

DIGEST: This bill provides collective bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees who are exempt from state civil service by making the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified, judicial branch employees.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes, in the California Constitution, the Judicial Council which has responsibility to survey judicial business; study the operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the Governor, and the Legislature.
2. Exempts, in the California Constitution, officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer of the courts from civil service.
3. Provides, under the Dills Act, collective bargaining for state employees of the executive branch which establishes a process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment for represented employees. Managerial, supervisory, and confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.
4. Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
5. Establishes the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), a quasi-judicial administrative agency, to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering public employees including school, college, state, local agency, and trial court employees.
6. Requires the Governor and the recognized state employee organizations to meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment and, if an agreement is reached, jointly prepare a written memorandum of understanding which shall be presented, when appropriate, to the Legislature for determination.

This bill:

1. Provides that the Dills Act shall apply to employees of the Judicial Council, as specified.
2. Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial Council except for managerial, supervisory, and confidential employees, as specified. Also provides that the definition of "state employee" does not include any judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.
3. Defines "employer", for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council.
4. Requires that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representative, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council.
5. Provides that provisions of the Dills Act governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of Understanding shall not apply to the Judicial Council and its employees.
6. Prohibits PERB, when determining appropriate bargaining units for Judicial Council employees, from including them in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than Judicial Council employees.
7. Gives the Judicial Council has the authority and discretion to designate state employee positions as excluded positions provided that managerial, supervisory, confidential, and excluded positions not included in bargaining units under this provision shall not exceed one third of the total authorized Judicial Council positions as stated in the Department of Finance Salaries and Wages Supplement.
8. Provides that the designation of the excluded positions under this section shall not be subject to review by PERB.

Background

Although TCEPGA provides collective bargaining rights to California trial court employees, their Judicial Council colleagues doing similar work do not have collective bargaining rights because they are constitutionally exempt from state civil service and thus, not covered by the Dills Act which provides collective bargaining rights to state employees. Since Judicial Council employees are state employees, the Dills Act may be an appropriate framework for providing collective bargaining rights.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions.
• To the extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in unknown increased ongoing employment costs.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/15/16)

Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (source)

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees

California Labor Federation

California State Council of the Service Employees International Union

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/12/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the sponsor, “since Judicial Council employees are expressly exempt from state civil service rules by Article 7 Section 4(b) of the California Constitution, the Dills Act does not confer bargaining rights for Judicial Council employees.

“As a result, Judicial Council employees are not represented by a union, but would like to be. The Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees due to the state’s constitutional prohibition. However, the Dills Act can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees to allow them union representation.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 52-25, 6/2/15

AYES: Alejo, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gray, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Waldron, Weber, Williams, Wood, Atkins

NOES: Achadjian, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Brough, Chang, Dahle, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Jones, Kim, Lackey, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, Melendez, Obernolte, Olsen, Patterson, Steinorth, Wagner, Wilk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Brown, Chávez, Gordon

Prepared by:

8/15/16 20:33:18

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 874 (Santiago) - Collective bargaining: Judicial Council

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on August 11, 2016

Bill Summary:

AB 874 would provide collective bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees who are exempt from state civil service by making the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified, judicial branch employees.

Fiscal Impact:

• Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions.
• To the extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in unknown increased ongoing employment costs.

Author Amendments:

Make clarifying changes and specify that the bill would apply to part time employees.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

AB 874 (Santiago) - Collective bargaining: Judicial Council

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

AB 874 would provide collective bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees who are exempt from state civil service by making the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified, judicial branch employees.

Fiscal Impact:

• Annual General Fund costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars annually to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions.
• To the extent that the bill results in salary or benefits increase resulting from collective bargaining, the bill could result in unknown increased ongoing employment costs.

Background:

The California Constitution (Constitution) designates most State employees as members of civil service. However, the Constitution specifies that some state employees are “at will” employees and not civil service members. As an example, legislative employees and Judicial Council employees are excluded under the Constitution from civil service and instead are “at will” employees. Due to the Constitutional constraint, the Legislature cannot convert Judicial Council employees into members of the civil service. However, the Legislature can statutorily grant any “at will” public employees the right to join an employee organization and collectively bargain.

The Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) allows state executive branch employees to bargain collectively for their wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. Under the Dills Act, managers and confidential employees are not granted collective bargaining rights. This bill would make the Dills Act applicable to Judicial Council employees, thereby providing Judicial Council employees the right to join an employee organization and collectively bargain with their employer--the Judicial Council. Under the bill, the collective bargaining rights would extend to all Judicial Council employees except managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, government affairs employees, and human resources employees.

Proposed Law:

This bill would, among other things, do the following:

• Provide that the Dills Act shall apply to employees of the Judicial Council, as specified.
• Require that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representative, acting with the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
• Prohibits PERB, when determining appropriate bargaining units for Judicial Council employees, from including them in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than Judicial Council employees.

Staff Comments:

As noted previously, the Constitution exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions, or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof. Current law provides collective bargaining rights for state employees of the executive branch under the Dills Act, which establishes processes for determining wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment for represented employees. The Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act provides a similar regulatory labor relations framework for trial court employees. As a result of that legislation, trial court employees are currently represented by SEIU.

This bill would create a framework to allow Judicial Council employees to be represented by a union. Approximately 575 employees could be affected by this bill.

-- END --

SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair

2015-2016 Regular Session

Bill No: AB 874 (Author:Santiago)

Version: June 13, 2016

Hearing Date: June 21, 2016

Fiscal: Yes

Urgency: No

Consultant: ME

SUBJECT

Collective bargaining: Judicial Council

DESCRIPTION

This bill would amend the Ralph C. Dills Act to make it applicable to Judicial Council employees, thereby providing Judicial Council employees the right to join an employee organization and collectively bargain. This right would extend to all Judicial Council employees except managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, government affairs employees, and human resources employees.

BACKGROUND

The California Constitution (Constitution) designates most State employees as members of the Civil Service. However, the Constitution specifies that some State employees are “at will” employees and not members of the civil service. As an example, legislative employees and Judicial Council employees are excluded under the Constitution from civil service and are “at will” employees. Due to the Constitutional constraint, the Legislature cannot convert Judicial Council employees into members of the civil service. However, the Legislature can statutorily grant any “at will” public employees the right to join an employee organization and collectively bargain.

The Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) allows state executive branch employees to bargain collectively for their wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment. Under the Dills Act, managers and confidential employees are not granted collective bargaining rights. This bill would make the Dills Act applicable to Judicial Council employees, thereby providing Judicial Council employees the right to join an employee organization and collectively bargain with their employer--the Judicial Council. Under the bill, the collective bargaining rights would extend to all Judicial Council employees except managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, government affairs employees, and human resources employees.

This bill was heard in Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 13 2016, and passed out of the Committee on a 3-2 vote.

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

Existing law provides that the civil service includes every employee of the State except as provided in the Constitution. (Cal. Const. art. 7, Sec. 1.)

Existing law exempts some State employees from the civil service, including legislative employees and officers and employees appointed or employees by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof. (Cal. Const. art. 7, Sec. 4.)

Existing law, the Ralph C. Dills Act, provides rights of collective bargaining for state employees, as defined, the mechanism for exercising those rights, and the obligations of the state employees, Governor, and employee organizations. (Gov. Code Secs. 3512-3524.)

Existing law defines “state employees” for the purpose of the Ralph C. Dills Act as any civil service employee of the state, and the teaching staff or schools under the jurisdiction of the State Department of Education or the Superintendent of Public Instruction. (Gov. Code Sec. 3513(c)(1).)

Existing law excludes the following from the definition of “state employees” for the purposes of the Ralph C. Dills Act:

• managerial, confidential, and supervisory employees;
• employees of the Department of Human Resources;
• professional employees of the Department of Finance engaged in technical or analytical state budget preparation other than the auditing staff;
• professional employees in the Personnel/Payroll Services Division of the Controller’s office engaged in technical or analytical duties in support of the state’s personnel and payroll systems other than the training staff;
• employees of the Legislative Counsel Bureau;
• employees of the Bureau of State Audits;
• employees of the office of the Inspector General;
• employees of the board, conciliators employed by the California State Mediation and Conciliation Service;
• employees of the Office of the State Chief Information Officer except as specified; and
• intermittent athletic inspectors who are employees of the State Athletic Commission. (Gov. Code Sec. 3513(c)(1).)

Existing law provides that state employees, as defined by the Ralph C. Dills Act, have the right to form, join, and participate in the activities of employee organizations of their own choosing for the purpose of representation on all matters of employer-employee relations. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.)

Existing law provides that employee organizations shall have the right to represent their members in their employment relations with the state, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.5.)

Existing law provides that the scope of representation shall be limited to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 3515.6.)

Existing law provides that the Governor or his representative as may be properly designated by law shall meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with representatives of recognized employee organizations, and shall consider fully such presentations as are made by the employee organization on behalf of its members prior to arriving at a determination of policy or course of action. (Gov. Code Sec. 3517.)

Existing law provides that the Governor and the recognized employee organization shall jointly prepare a written memorandum of understanding (MOU) when they reach agreement and shall present the MOU to the Legislature for determination. (Gov. Code Sec. 3517.5.)

Existing law provides that if the Governor and employee organization fail to reach an agreement within a reasonable period of time, the Governor and the organization may agree upon the appointment of a mediator, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 3518.)

This bill extends the provisions of the Ralph C. Dills Act to all Judicial Council employees, except managerial employees, confidential employees, supervisory employees, employees in the offices of human resources, and employees in the offices of government affairs.

This bill clarifies that the provisions of the Ralph C. Dills Act do not apply to judicial officers or employees of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.

This bill provides that the employer for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith, for the Judicial Council employees, means the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of the chairperson of the Judicial Council.

This bill excludes the Judicial Council employee organization and Administrative Director of the Courts or designated representative from the requirement of preparing a written memorandum of understanding (MOU) when they reach agreement and from the requirement to present the MOU to the Legislature for determination, and from other provisions related to the Ralph C. Dills Act MOU requirement.

This bill provides that the Judicial Council employees may not be included in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than those of the Judicial Council.

COMMENT

1. Stated need for the bill

According to the author:

Since Judicial Council employees are expressly exempt from state civil service rules by Article 7 Section 4(b) of the California Constitution, the Dills Act does not confer bargaining rights for Judicial Council employees. As a result, Judicial Council employees are not represented by a union, but would like to be. The Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees due to the state’s constitutional prohibition. However, the Dills Act can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees to allow them union representation if they choose to. Since Judicial Council employees are state employees, the Dills Act may be an appropriate framework for providing collective bargaining rights.

1. Judicial Council employees want the opportunity to organize and collectively bargain

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), Local 1000, represents 95,000 public employees statewide and is the sponsor of this bill. According to the sponsor, “Judicial Council employees approached [SEIU, Local 1000] asking the [union] to represent them in bargaining.” SEIU, Local 1000 is sponsoring this bill to allow the Judicial Council employees a path to union representation if the “employees organize themselves and choose to be represented.” According to the Judicial Council, they have “adopted a neutral position on the policy of AB 874.” As currently drafted, this bill would exclude managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees from the Judicial Council employee bargaining unit. Similarly, under the Dills Act, managerial employees, confidential employees, and supervisory employees are excluded from the state employee bargaining units. Staff notes that a typical agency in the Executive branch would exempt managerial, confidential, and supervisory employees from the bargaining unit. Staff also notes that California trial court employees are entitled to collectively bargain under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act. (See Gov. Code Secs. 71600-71618.)

1. The Bargaining Unit

The author previously agreed to exclude employees in the Judicial Council’s offices of human resources and government affairs from the bargaining unit. However, the author reports that after the most recent amendments SEIU Local 1000 and the Judicial Council agreed to a bargaining unit that simply excludes managerial, supervisorial, and confidential employees. The agreement also allows the Judicial Council to designate the confidential positions so long as the managerial, supervisory, and confidential positions exempted do not exceed one-third of the total permanent full-time Judicial Council employees. The author proposes the following amendments to reflect the agreement regarding the appropriate bargaining unit.

Author’s amendments:

On page 4, in line 38, strike out “confidential employee, or”

On page 4, in line 39, after “supervisory employee” insert: “or a confidential employee as defined in (e)”

On page 4, in line 40, strike out “include:” and insert “include a”

On page 5, in line 1, strike out “(A) A”

On page 5, strike out lines 3, 4, and 5 entirely

On page 5, after “Judicial Council.” insert “(e) The Judicial Council has the authority to designate state employee positions and confidential positions. Managerial, supervisory, and confidential positions exempted under this provision shall not exceed one third of the total permanent full-time Judicial Council employees.”

Support: California Labor Federation

Opposition: None Known

HISTORY

Source: American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO; Service Employees International Union, Local 1000

Related Pending Legislation: None Known

Prior Legislation: AB 2381 (Hernández, 2012) This bill would have amended the Ralph C. Dills Act to make it applicable to Judicial Council employees. This bill was held in Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee.

Prior Vote:

Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee (Ayes 3, Noes 2)

Assembly Floor (Ayes 52, Noes 25)

Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 12, Noes 5)

Assembly Public Employees, Retirement/Soc Sec Committee (Ayes 6, Noes 1)

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT

Dr. Richard Pan, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: AB 874 Hearing Date: 4/25/16

Subject: Collective bargaining: Judicial Council

SOURCE: Service Employees International Union, Local 1000

ASSEMBLY VOTES:

DIGEST: This bill provides collective bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees who are exempt from state civil service by making the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified, judicial branch employees.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes, in the California Constitution, the Judicial Council which has responsibility to survey judicial business; study the operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the Governor, and the Legislature.
2. Exempts, in the California Constitution, officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer of the courts from civil service.
3. Provides, under the Dills Act, collective bargaining for state employees of the executive branch which establishes a process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment for represented employees. Managers and confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.
4. Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).
5. Establishes the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB), a quasi-judicial administrative agency, to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering public employees including school, college, state, local agency, and trial court employees.
6. Requires the Governor and the recognized state employee organizations to meet and confer in good faith regarding wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment and, if an agreement is reached, jointly prepare a written memorandum of understanding which shall be presented, when appropriate, to the Legislature for determination.

This bill:

1. Provides that the Dills Act shall apply to employees of the Judicial Council, as specified.
2. Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial Council except for managerial, confidential, and supervisory employees. Also provides that the definition of "state employee" does not include any judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.
3. Defines "employer", for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith, as the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representatives, acting with the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
4. Requires that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act, shall mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designated representative, acting with the authorization of chairperson of the Judicial Council.
5. Provides that provisions of the Dills Act governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of Understanding shall not apply to the Judicial Council and its employees.
6. Prohibits PERB, when determining appropriate bargaining units for Judicial Council employees, from including them in a bargaining unit that includes employees other than Judicial Council employees.

Background

Although TCEPGA provides collective bargaining rights to California trial court employees, their Judicial Council colleagues doing similar work do not have collective bargaining rights because they are constitutionally exempt from state civil service and thus, not covered by the Dills Act which provides collective bargaining rights to state employees. Since Judicial Council employees are state employees, the Dills Act may be an appropriate framework for providing collective bargaining rights.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

SUPPORT:

Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (source)

OPPOSITION:

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the sponsor, “since Judicial Council employees are expressly exempt from state civil service rules by Article 7 Section 4(b) of the California Constitution, the Dills Act does not confer bargaining rights for Judicial Council employees.”

“As a result, Judicial Council employees are not represented by a union, but would like to be. The Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees due to the state’s constitutional prohibition. However, the Dills Act can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees to allow them union representation.”

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 874

Author:(Rendon)

As Amended Ver:March 26, 2015

Majority vote

SUMMARY: Makes the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) applicable to specified employees of the Judicial Council. Specifically, this bill:

1. Specifies that the Dills Act applies to employees of the Judicial Council.

2. Defines "state employee" to include any employee of the Judicial Council except for managerial, confidential, and supervisory employees.

3. Excludes from the definition of "state employee" any judicial officer or employee of the Supreme Court, the courts of appeal, or the Habeas Corpus Resource Center.

4. Designates the Administrative Director of the Courts, or his or her designee, acting with the chairperson of the Judicial Council's authorization, as the "employer" for purposes of bargaining or meeting and conferring in good faith.

5. Specifies that references to actions or decisions by the Governor, or his or her designee, in the Dills Act mean actions or decisions by the Administrative Director of the Courts, as specified.

6. Specifically excludes certain provisions of the Dills Act governing legislative review and approval of state Memoranda of Understanding from applying to the Judicial Council and its employees.

7. Requires the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) when determining appropriate bargaining units for these employees to not include them in a bargaining unit that includes other employees.

EXISTING LAW:

1. The California Constitution:

   1. Establishes the Judicial Council which has constitutional responsibility to survey judicial business; study the operation of the courts; adopt rules not inconsistent with statute in the areas of court administration, practice, and procedure; and make recommendations to the courts, the Governor, and the Legislature.

   2. Exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof.

2. State law:

   1. Provides collective bargaining for state employees of the executive branch under the Dills Act which establishes a process for determining wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment for represented employees. Managers and confidential employees are excluded from bargaining rights.

   2. Regulates labor relations between trial courts and trial court employees under the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA).

   3. Establishes PERB, a quasi-judicial administrative agency, to administer the collective bargaining statutes covering public employees including school, college, state, local agency, and trial court employees.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. Annual General and Special Fund costs of $400,000 to $750,000 to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions.

2. Increased ongoing employment costs following any salary or benefits increases resulting from union bargaining.

COMMENTS: According to the author, "Judicial Council state employees are currently not represented by a union but would like to be. As the law stands currently, the Dills Act does not apply to Judicial Council employees. Government Code cannot be amended to make Judicial Council employees civil service employees, because they are specifically exempted from civil service by Article 7 of the California State Constitution. However, the Dills Act or the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) can be amended to confer bargaining rights to Judicial Council employees.

"Trial court employees are already represented by SEIU pursuant to the Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act (TCEPGA). Judicial Council employees have requested that SEIU Local 1000 represent them in bargaining on the terms and conditions of employment.

"SEIU Local 1000 believes that it can represent Judicial Council employees under the current MMBA statute. However, the applicability of the current MMBA statute to Judicial Council employees can only be confirmed by going through a PERB representation petition process. This process includes a representation petition being submitted to PERB with the appropriate number of authorizing employee signatures, and an administrative hearing on the merits of the petition.

"In the event that PERB determines the MMBA, as currently drafted, is inapplicable to Judicial Council employees, the proposed bill serves to clarify that Judicial Council employees can be represented by a union."

Based on information provided to the Committee by the Judicial Council, there are approximately 574 non-managerial/non-supervisorial employees that could be impacted by this bill.

Analysis Prepared by: Karon Green / P.E.,R., & S.S. / (916) 319-3957 FN: 0000595

Date of Hearing: May 6, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 874

Author:(Rendon) – As Amended Ver:March 26, 2015

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill applies the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) to employees of the Judicial Council, subject to certain specified exemptions. As a result, Judicial Council employees could be represented by a union.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1) Annual General and Special Fund costs of $400,000 to $750,000 to Judicial Council to establish and maintain labor and employee relations functions.

2) Increased ongoing employment costs following any salary or benefits increases resulting from union bargaining.

COMMENTS:

1) Purpose. According to the author, Judicial Council employees are not represented by a union, but would like to be. Service Employees International Union Local 1000 (SEIU) believes it can represent Judicial Council employees under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA), however recognition can only be confirmed by undertaking a representation petition process with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). According to the author, in the event PERB determines MMBA is inapplicable to Judicial Council employees, AB 874 serves to clarify that Judicial Council employees can be represented by a union under the Dills Act.

2) Judicial Employees. The California Constitution exempts from civil service officers and employees appointed or employed by councils, commissions, or public corporations in the judicial branch or by a court of record or officer thereof. Existing law provides collective bargaining rights for state employees of the executive branch under the Dills Act, which establishes processes for determining wages, hours, terms, and conditions of employment for represented employees. The Trial Court Employment Protection and Governance Act provides a similar regulatory labor relations framework for trial court employees. As a result of that legislation, trial court employees are currently represented by SEIU.

This bill creates a framework to allow Judicial Council employees to be represented by a union. According to the Judicial Council, approximately 575 employees could be affected by this bill.

Analysis Prepared by: Joel Tashjian / APPR. / (916) 319-2081