Existing law, the State Civil Service Act, creates the Department of Human Resources and grants to the department the powers, duties, and authority necessary to operate the state civil service system in accordance with Article VII of the California Constitution, the Government Code, the merit principle, and applicable rules duly adopted by the State Personnel Board. Existing law requires the State Personnel Board to prescribe rules consistent with a merit-based civil service system to govern classifications, examinations, probationary periods, disciplinary actions, appointments, and other matters related to the boards authority under the California Constitution.

This bill would require the department, until July 1, 2032, to administer and oversee the Career Development Apprenticeship Program, which would provide an alternative to the traditional civil service examination and appointment process, as specified. The bill would require the department or its designee to conduct competitive examinations in the form of career development apprenticeship evaluations to determine the qualifications and readiness of career development apprentices for permanent state employment. The bill would require apprenticeship appointments to be made on a provisional basis, and would specify candidates serving in an apprenticeship appointment shall not acquire permanent civil service status for the duration of the term of the apprentice evaluation period. The bill would require the department or its designee to develop job-related evaluation standards that are appropriate tests of fitness for the job classification, as specified, and to provide a final evaluation to each apprentice at the end of the evaluation period that contains a determination as to whether the apprentice meets the minimum qualifications and a certification as to whether the apprentice successfully passed the evaluation period and should be transitioned to a permanent civil service appointment. The bill would also require the department, on June 30, 2026, and annually thereafter, to submit to the Legislature and publicly post on its internet website a report for the prior program and fiscal year that summarizes and details substantive qualitative and quantitative outcomes, as specified.

Existing law establishes the Division of Apprenticeship Standards within the Department of Industrial Relations and charges it with various duties related to apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs. Existing law requires the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards, or their duly authorized representative, to administer these provisions. Under existing law, the chief is required to issue rules and regulations that establish standards for minimum wages, maximum hours, and working conditions for apprentice agreements.

This bill would require rules and regulations issued pursuant to those provisions to be consistent with the provisions governing the Career Development Apprenticeship Program, as described above, and the rules of the State Personnel Board.

Existing law authorizes an apprenticeship program to be administered by a joint apprenticeship committee, unilateral management or labor apprenticeship committee, or an individual employer.

This bill would require apprenticeship programs for classifications determined to be eligible for recruitment under the Career Development Apprenticeship Program to be administered by the Department of Human Resources with the advice of a unilateral apprenticeship committee or a joint apprenticeship committee. The bill would further require apprenticeship programs under the Career Development Apprenticeship Program to also be governed by standards for apprenticeship programs set forth in the Labor Code, as specified. In this connection, the bill would authorize the chief to issue rules and regulations that govern apprenticeship programs under the Career Development Apprenticeship Program, including the approval and denial of programs, registration of agreements, and other related matters, as prescribed. Among other provisions, the bill would provide that the function of a joint apprenticeship committee, for programs under the Career Development Apprenticeship Program, is to advise the Department of Human Resources in establishing work processes, conditions, and related duties. The bill would establish procedures for disputes, wage rates, apprenticeship terms, probationary periods, and related matters pursuant to these provisions.

Under existing law, the Department of Human Resources succeeds to, and is vested with, the duties, purposes, responsibilities, and jurisdiction exercised by the State Personnel Board with respect to the administration of the Personnel Classification Plan. Existing law prohibits a person from being assigned to perform the duties of any class other than that to which their position is allocated, except as specified.

This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to those provisions.

Date of Hearing: April 17, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT

Liz Ortega, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 3041 (

Author:Wendy Carrillo) – As Amended Ver:April 4, 2024

SUBJECT: Civil service: Career Development Apprenticeship Program

SUMMARY: Establishes, as an alternative to the traditional civil service examination and appointment process, the Career Development Apprenticeship Program (CDAP) to be administered and overseen by the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR), and requires the Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS) within the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) to issue rules and regulations pursuant to, and consistent with, provisions governing the CDAP, among other provisions.

(Please note this analysis only reflects the provisions of the bill that impact the Labor Code.)

Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that, as they relate to the CDAP, rules and regulations issued by the Chief of the DAS as part of their duties under existing law must be consistent with State Personnel Board (SPB) rules, as specified.
2. Requires that apprenticeship programs for classifications determined to be eligible for recruitment under the CDAP be administered by the CalHR with the advice of a joint apprenticeship committee.
3. Provides that, given the state’s public policy encouraging apprenticeships as a form of on-the-job training, apprenticeship programs under the CDAP must be consistent with the provisions of this proposed statute.
4. Requires that an apprenticeship established pursuant to the CDAP must be governed by the standards of the proposed statute, except as otherwise provided.
5. Provides that the Chief of DAS, in in consultation with the Interagency Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship, may issue rules and regulations that govern apprenticeship programs under the CDAP, including the approval and denial of programs, registration of agreements, evaluations, working conditions, and minimum standards.
6. Requires that, pending the issuance of rules and regulations, certain existing rules and regulations apply to apprenticeship programs under CDAP, except as otherwise provided, and provides that such rules and regulations shall be consistent with SPB rules, as specified.
7. Establishes the functions, roles, and duties of the joint apprenticeship committee for programs under the CDAP, which include:
   1. Providing advice to the CalHR in establishing work processes, working conditions, selection procedures, and the number of apprentices that shall be employed in the trade or classification under apprentice agreements.
   2. Approving apprentice agreements and aiding in the adjustment of apprenticeship disputes, as prescribed.
8. Requires that disputes resulting from actions taken pursuant to the proposed statute under the Government Code be duly noticed to the involved interested parties; requires CalHR, in accordance with SPB rule, to make the final determination in any proceedings pursuant to the proposed statute; and requires any appeals to be prescribed by SPB rule and be consistent with the proposed statute under the Government Code.
9. Requires that, upon request, the joint apprenticeship committee be provided with an opportunity to meet with CalHR to discuss any apprenticeship disputes, including any apprentices who are not meeting their obligations under the CDAP.
10. Establishes that wage rates for Career Development Apprentices must be determined in accordance with the Ralph C. Dills Act governing state employer-employee relations.
11. Provides that certain provisions requiring program sponsors to establish apprenticeship program selection procedures does not apply to the CDAP.
12. Provides that the term of apprenticeship for programs in the CDAP shall be determined in accordance with the proposed statutes under the Government Code.
13. Provides that CDAP has the same meaning in the Labor Code as it does in the proposed sections of the Government Code, which is to provide an alternative to the traditional civil service examination and appointment process to help the state address persistently high vacancy rates in certain designated classifications with training and hiring needs by providing broader access to civil service careers by eliminating barriers to employment.
14. Provides that certain provisions requiring apprentice agreements to contain information about probationary periods for apprentices do not apply to the CDAP.
15. Requires that, for programs under the CDAP, the probationary period be the term of the apprenticeship or determined in accordance with applicable law governing, and the rules of, the SPB and that, following this probationary period and successful completion of the evaluation period, the apprentices serve a civil service probationary period, as specified.
16. Requires that, for programs under the CDAP, the apprentice agreement contain a provision stating that all controversies or differences concerning the apprentice agreement that cannot be adjusted locally, or that are not covered by collective bargaining agreement, shall be determined under the proposed statutes in the Government Code and SPB rules.
17. Provides that certain provisions that provide for the term of an apprenticeship to be measured either through the completion of the industry standard for hours of on-the-job learning and related and supplemental instruction, attainment of competency, or a hybrid blend of the time-based and competency-based approaches, do not apply to the CDAP and instead requires CDAP programs to be governed by the proposed statutes under the Government Code.
18. Provides that apprentice agreements for programs under the CDAP may be alternatively signed by the joint apprenticeship committee, rather than the employer or program sponsor, as is required under existing law.
19. Prohibits, notwithstanding existing law provisions, an apprenticeship program under the CDAP being solely signed by an authorized representative of an organization of employees.
20. Provides that certain provisions related to hearings, investigations, and determinations of violations of apprentice agreements do not apply to programs under the CDAP, except as specified.
21. Provides that certain provisions related to noticing determinations of violations as described in 20) above, and appeals thereof, do not apply to programs under the CDAP, except as specified.
22. Prohibits a person from instituting any action for enforcement of any apprentice agreement or damages for the breach of any apprentice agreement, as it pertains to the proposed statute, until they have exhausted all administrative remedies provided by the proposed statute, by rule of the SPB, or by any other law applicable to apprentices.
23. Provides that certain provisions allowing for reasonable costs for expense occurred to be charged after an applicant has been accepted into the apprenticeship program do not apply to programs under the CDAP.
24. Defines the following terms:
    1. “Appointing power” to mean a person or group having authority to make appointments to positions in the state civil service, as defined in existing law.
    2. “Board” to mean the State Personnel Board.
    3. “Career development apprentice” or “apprentice” to mean: (i) a person at least 16 years of age who has entered into a written agreement called an “apprentice agreement” with an employer or program sponsor, and for which the term of the apprenticeship for each apprenticeable occupation must be approved, as prescribed; and, (ii) is an applicant who meets standardized, job-related criteria, as defined by department rule, who participates in a competitive selection process for admittance to the program, but does not meet the minimum qualifications in the classification specification for permanent appointment to the classification.
    4. “Department” to mean the CalHR.
    5. “Joint apprenticeship committee” to mean an apprenticeship committee composed of an equal number of employer and employee representatives that perform certain prescribed functions.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides for apprenticeship programs within the DAS within the DIR, sponsored by specific entities and employers, and requires the Chief of the DAS to perform various functions with respect to apprenticeship programs and the welfare of apprentices. Labor Code § 3070 et seq.
2. Establishes the California Apprenticeship Council to issue rules and regulations which establish standards for minimum wages, maximum hours, and working conditions for apprentice agreements in the building and construction trades and for firefighter occupations. Labor Code § 3070-3071.
3. Establishes the Interagency Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship to provide advice and guidance to the Administrator of Apprenticeship and the Chief of DAS on apprenticeship programs, and agreements that are not within the jurisdiction of the California Apprenticeship Council and on the development and administration of standards governing preapprenticeship, certification, and on-the-job training and retraining programs outside the building and construction trades and firefighters. Labor Code § 3071.5.
4. Provides that the Director of DIR is ex officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship and is authorized to appoint assistants as necessary to carry out this statute. Labor Code § 3072.
5. Provides that an apprenticeship program may be administered by a joint apprenticeship committee, unilateral management or labor apprenticeship committee, or an individual employer; that programs may be approved by the Chief of DAS in any trade or area of the state; and that where a collective bargaining agreement exists, requires a program to be jointly sponsored, as specified. Labor Code § 3075(a).
6. Establishes that it is the public policy of this state to encourage the utilization of apprenticeship as a form of On-the-Job Training, when training is cost-effective in developing skills needed to perform public services; requires state and local public agencies to make a diligent effort to establish apprenticeship programs for apprenticeable occupations in their respective workforces; in furtherance of this policy, requires public agencies to take into consideration (a) the extent to which a continuous supply of trained personnel is readily available to public agencies to meet their skills requirements in the various occupations which are determined to be apprenticeable, and (b) the application of established programs in the private sector, where appropriate; and provides that public sector apprenticeship programs should be fully compatible with affirmative action goals for the participation of minorities and women in apprenticeship programs. Labor Code § 3075.1.
7. Requires apprenticeship program sponsors to establish selection procedures and make them available to applicants and the Chief of DAS, as specified. Labor Code § 3076.3.
8. Defines the term “apprentice” to mean a person at least 16 years of age who has entered into an apprentice agreement with an employer or program sponsor, and requires the term of apprenticeship for each apprenticeable occupation to be approved by the Chief of DAS. Labor Code § 3077.
9. Requires every apprentice agreement to include, among other things:
   1. A statement providing for a period of probation during which time the apprentice agreement may be terminated by the program sponsor at the request in writing of either party, and providing that after the probationary period the apprentice agreement may be terminated by the administrator by mutual agreement of all parties thereto, or canceled by the administrator for good and sufficient reason; and requires the period of probation to be reasonable in relation to the full apprenticeship term, as specified, with full credit given for such period toward completion of the apprenticeship. Labor Code § 3078(g).
   2. A provision that all controversies or differences concerning the apprentice agreement which cannot be adjusted locally, or which are not covered by collective bargaining agreement, shall be submitted to the administrator for determination as specified. Labor Code § 3078(h).
10. Provides that the term of apprenticeship may be measured either through the completion of the industry standard for hours of on-the-job learning and related and supplemental instruction, attainment of competency, or a hybrid blend of the time-based and competency-based approaches, as specified, but that programs in the building and construction trades and for firefighters shall use the time-based approach. Labor Code § 3078.5.
11. Requires apprentice agreements to be approved by the local joint apprenticeship committee or the parties to a collective bargaining agreement, or by the administrator where there is no collective bargaining agreement or joint committee, and be signed by the employer, or his or her agent, or by a program sponsor, as specified, and by the apprentice, as specified. Labor Code § 3079.
12. Allows, in certain circumstances, an apprentice agreement to be signed by an association of employers or an organization of employees instead of by an individual employer, as specified. Labor Code § 3080.
13. Allows the administrator to investigate to determine if there has been a violation of the terms of an apprentice agreement, and he or she may hold hearings, inquiries, and other proceedings necessary to such investigations and determinations, as specified. Labor Code § 3081.
14. Requires the determination of the administrator to be in writing and sent by regular mail to the parties’ last known addresses, with proof of service as specified; for complaints involving programs in the building and construction trades and for firefighters, the determination shall be filed with the California Apprenticeship Council; and provides for appeals, as specified. Labor Code § 3082.
15. Provides that no person shall institute any action for the enforcement of any apprentice agreement, or damages for the breach of any apprentice agreement, unless all administrative remedies have first been exhausted. Labor Code § 3085.
16. Provides that neither existing law nor approved apprentice agreements can operate to invalidate any apprenticeship provision in any collective bargaining agreement between employers and employees setting up higher apprenticeship standards. Labor Code § 3086.
17. Provides that acceptance of an application for entrance into an apprenticeship training program shall not be predicated on the payment of any fee, but that reasonable costs for expense incurred may be charged after an applicant has been accepted into the program. Labor Code § 3091.
18. Creates the CalHR and vests it with the powers, duties, and authorities necessary to operate the state civil service system pursuant to Article VII of the California Constitution, the Government Code, the merit principle, and applicable rules duly adopted by the SPB. Government Code § 18500 et seq.
19. Creates the state civil service that includes every officer and employee of the State except a limited number of specified, exempted officers and employees, and requires that the state make permanent appointment and promotion in the civil service under a general system based on merit ascertained by competitive examination. California Constitution, Art. VII, § 1 and 4.
20. Establishes the State Civil Service Act to facilitate the operation of the Constitution’s merit principle for the state civil service; requires the SPB to prescribe rules consistent with a merit based civil service system to govern appointments classifications, examinations, probationary periods, disciplinary actions, and other matters related to the SPB’s authority; authorizes the SPB to conduct audits and investigations of the personnel practices of CalHR and appointing authorities to ensure compliance with civil service policies, procedures, and statutes. Government Code § 18500 et seq.
21. Establishes the SPB and requires it to enforce civil service statutes and, by majority vote of all its members, prescribe probationary periods and classifications, adopt other rules authorized by statute, and review disciplinary actions. California Constitution, Article VII, § 2 and 3.

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown

COMMENTS: Apprenticeship is a system of training in a trade or profession that combines both classroom study and on-the-job training. The DAS within the DIR administers California apprenticeship law and establishes apprenticeship standards for wages, hours, working conditions and the specific skills required for state certification as a journeyperson in an apprenticeable occupation. It promotes apprenticeship training, consults with program sponsors, and monitors programs to ensure high standards for on-the-job training and supplemental classroom instruction. Although “traditional” apprenticeship programs are in the building and construction trades, registered apprenticeship programs now exist in a wide variety industries, including healthcare, technology, advanced manufacturing, public service and more.

Governor Gavin Newsom has set a goal for the state to serve 500,000 apprentices by 2029. The number of apprentices in California has increased dramatically in recent years, in part due to new and increased funding by the State of California. This includes Apprenticeship Innovation Funding to scale and expand apprenticeship programs in nontraditional industries, the California Opportunity Youth Apprenticeship grant program to increase opportunities for at-risk youth in the state, and the Equal Representation in Construction Apprenticeships grant program to provide funding to help women and other underserved populations enter the building and construction trades.

Existing apprenticeship programs in state government include:

• A Licensed Vocational Nurse-to-Registered-Nurse apprenticeship program that offers upward mobility to State Bargaining Unit 20 (Medical and Social Services) healthcare workers at California Correctional Health Care Services.
• A financial services apprenticeship program with concentrations in auditing and accounting, established through a joint and collaborative effort between Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (SEIU Local 1000), the state Governmental Operations Agency (GovOps), CalHR, Employment Development Department, California Tax and Fee Administration, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Department of State Hospitals, California State Lottery, DIR and American River College.
• An information technology apprenticeship program that focuses on help desk and client services, mainframe computing technology, cybersecurity, and networking, established via a collaborative effort between SEIU Local 1000 and GovOps, the California Department of Technology, the DAS, IBM, and American River College.

According to the author, “Apprenticeship is a time-tested education and employment model that allows learners to earn money and benefits while acquiring valuable skills, experience, and education, and provides employers with staff needed to get the job done. This legislation will not only support the Governor’s goal of California for All and the creation of more internship opportunities in California but it will create broader candidate pools and equitable pathways while helping to fill the state’s most persistently high vacancy rate classifications and the need for qualified workers. These pathways will be available to current state employees and any Californian looking to enter into well-paying state careers.”

The author further states that, “This proposal would provide an alternative examination and appointment mechanism for state employment, including for marginalized individuals who, due to socioeconomic circumstances, do not have equal access to the experience and/or education typically necessary for even entry level state careers, while upholding the fair and competitive merit hiring principle.”

Committee Comments

SEIU Local 1000 is opposed to this bill and cites numerous concerns. Specifically, they are concerned about the diminished role of the joint apprenticeship committee in the bill as written. They also cite concerns that this bill would potentially expand the temporary civil service workforce due to the CDAP’s provisions calling for an apprenticeship program for up to two years followed by a one-year probationary period prior to candidates acquiring permanent civil service status.

One could argue that establishing CDAP is more appropriately addressed through collective bargaining, as it affects the terms and conditions of workers’ employment. A review of the current SEIU 1000 collective bargaining agreement with the State of California contains numerous provisions on apprenticeship.

Arguments in Support

None on file.

Arguments in Opposition

SEIU Local 1000 is in opposition and states, “The State of California and the US Department of Labor both have longstanding apprenticeship laws that establish the rules and functions of a JAC (i.e. the requirement that the employer permit joint administration of an apprenticeship with an employee organization when there is a bargaining agreement in place and establishing the JAC’s role as significantly more than advisory), apprentice probationary periods, and ongoing salary progression based on the apprentice’s achievement of work competencies during the term of the apprenticeship. Whereas, AB 3041 codifies the elimination of these requirements as they pertain to the State’s program. The bill’s proposed language is at odds with the intent and long-standing labor laws that have protected workers for decades.”

Prior and Related Legislation

SB 943 (Ochoa Bogh) of 2024 would require the CalHR, on or before January 1, 2026, to review the department Personnel Classification Plan and identify which classes are compatible with creating a waiver for a bachelor’s degree requirement for a veteran, as defined and provided, among other provisions. This bill is currently in the Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee.

AB 1493 (Carrillo) of 2023 would have established the CDAP, administered and overseen by the CalHR, to provide an alternative to the traditional civil service examination appointment process, among other provisions. This bill was held in the Assembly Public Employment and Retirement Committee at the request of the author.

AB 1693 (Bauer-Kahan) of 2023 would have eliminated a college degree as a minimum qualification in the state civil service for positions that do not require an associated required accreditation, unless the state agency can justify the need for the degree, among other provisions. This bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

AB 2358 (Carrillo) Chapter 365, Statutes of 2018 requires apprenticeship programs to develop and implement anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies and procedures.

AB 3231 (Gray), Chapter 682, Statutes of 2018 allows Joint Labor-Management Committees to bring civil action against an employer that fails to provide payroll records for inspection and requires the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and the California Apprenticeship Council to include any apprenticeship standards or regulations that were proposed or adopted in the previous year in their annual report.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

None on file.

Opposition

Service Employees International Union, Local 1000

Analysis Prepared by: Erin Hickey / L. & E. /

Date of Hearing: April 3, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT AND RETIREMENT

Tina S. McKinnor, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 3041 (

Author:Wendy Carrillo) – As Amended Ver:March 21, 2024

SUBJECT: Civil service: Career Development Apprenticeship Program

SUMMARY: To address persistently high vacancy rates in certain designated classifications within the state civil service and provide broader access to civil service careers by eliminating barriers to employment, this bill establishes the Career Development Apprenticeship Program (CDAP) to be administered and overseen by the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) by providing an alternative to the traditional civil service examination appointment process, and requires the Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS) within the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) to issue rules and regulations pursuant to, and consistent with, provisions governing the CDAP, among other provisions. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires the CalHR, consistent with State Personnel Board (SPB) rules and existing law relating to administration of apprenticeship programs, as prescribed, to administer and oversee the CDAP, and
2. Establishes that individuals hired by this process must be known as career development apprentices (CDAs).
3. Requires the CalHR, in consultation with applicable exclusive representatives, to determine eligible state civil service classifications for CDAP recruitment.
4. Requires the CalHR, or its designee, to conduct CDA evaluations as a competitive examination to determine the qualifications and readiness of CDAs for permanent state employment.
5. Authorizes the examination for purposes of the CDA evaluations to consist of on-the-job training (OJT) performance evaluation, academic evaluation (including the requirement to achieve passing grades, or any other OJT selection techniques deemed appropriate by the CalHR with advice from the joint apprenticeship committee (JAC).
6. Requires initial appointments to an eligible classification to allow the applicant to compete in the CDA evaluation to be known as apprenticeship appointments.
7. Requires the CalHR to refer names of individuals who meet eligibility criteria for participation in CDA evaluations to appointing powers for selection and apprenticeship appointment; all candidates meeting referral requirements must be eligible for initial apprenticeship appointment; and, authorizes the CalHR to prescribe methods for referring such names to provide for appropriate job placement.
8. Requires all apprenticeship appointments made pursuant to these provisions to be made on a provisional basis to allow candidates to demonstrate their ability to perform the duties of the position, and gain knowledge and skills necessary to meet minimum qualifications of the classification. During this period, the apprenticeship appointment is to be known as the apprentice evaluation period, and where the CalHR must determine the duration of the evaluation period (not to exceed two years, unless an extension is otherwise authorized by board rule). Further, termination of the apprenticeship appointment by the employee, appointing authority, or the CalHR at any time during the evaluation period must occur in accordance with SPB rule.
9. Prohibits candidates service in an apprenticeship appointment from acquiring permanent civil service status for the duration of the evaluation period; however, they must receive the same benefits that employees in temporary appointments are entitled.
10. Prohibits a CDA, during the apprentice evaluation period, from claiming any portion of the OJT experience gained during program participation as state classification experience towards meeting the minimum qualifications for permanent or limited-term appointment to the apprenticeship appointment classification or any other civil service classification.
11. Requires that only upon satisfactory completion of the apprentice evaluation period of an apprenticeship appointment must the CDA retroactively accrue the status of an apprenticeship appointment, as provided, and prohibits time retroactively accrued from being counted towards the completion of a probationary period.
12. Requires the CalHR, or its designees, to: (a) develop job-related evaluation standards that are appropriate tests for the job classification, and (b) seek advice from the joint apprenticeship committee regarding those standards. In addition, appointing powers are required to prepare periodic written evaluations of candidate performance during the apprentice evaluation period, and the CalHR is required to provide a final evaluation to each apprentice at the end of the evaluation period, as prescribed.
13. Establishes that upon successful completion of the apprentice evaluation period with a passing evaluation, the apprentice must be deemed to meet the minimum qualifications of the classification, qualified in the examination, and the appointing power must automatically transition the apprentice from provisionary status to a permanent appointment without further examination. Thereafter, the employee must serve a probationary period.
14. Authorizes program applicants, and CDAs in the CDA evaluation period, to appeal prescribed actions in accordance with SPB rule.
15. Incorporates the CDAP within various Sections of the Labor Code relating to apprenticeship programs, and more specifically, as to each of the following:
16. The duties and issuance of rules and regulations by the Chief of the DAS, as prescribed, but provides that such rules and regulations must be consistent with SPB rules, and grants certain other authorities to the Chief of the DAS, also as prescribed.
17. Administration, necessary conditions, and appeal of decisions regarding apprenticeship programs, but provides that apprenticeship programs for classifications determined to be eligible for recruitment under the CDAP must be administered by the CalHR with the advice of either a unilateral or joint apprenticeship committee.
18. The state’s public policy regarding apprenticeships as OJT program, providing that apprenticeship programs under the CDAP must be consistent with the provisions of this proposed statute.
19. Establishes, by adding to the Labor Code, that an apprenticeship established pursuant to the CDAP must be governed by the standards of the proposed statute, except as otherwise provided.
20. Establishes the functions, roles, and duties of the joint apprenticeship committee for programs under the CDAP. Along with providing advice to the CalHR, the joint apprenticeship committee is responsible for approving apprentice agreements and aiding in the adjustment of apprenticeship disputes, as prescribed.
21. Establishes that wage rates for CDAs must be determined in accordance with the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act) governing state employer-employee relations.
22. Excepts the CDAP from the following under the Labor Code relating to apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs within the jurisdiction of the DAS:
23. Certain required provisions relating to apprenticeship agreements, but prescribes the probationary period of program participants and their progression to the state civil service probationary period, as well as the resolution of apprentice agreement controversies or differences that cannot be adjusted locally or not covered by a collective bargaining agreement.
24. Provisions relating to measurement of the apprenticeship through time-based and competency-based approaches, but instead, references such approaches prescribed within this proposed statute.
25. Provisions relating to the execution of apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs by employers’ associations and employees’ organizations.
26. Provisions relating to investigation of agreement violations and hearings involving apprenticeship and preapprenticeship programs, except as otherwise provided.
27. The appeal of administrator determinations to the California Apprenticeship Council, except as otherwise provided.
28. Provisions relating to acceptance into apprenticeship training programs predicated on the payment of a fee.
29. Authorizes, relating to approval and execution of apprenticeship and preapprenticeship agreements under the Labor Code, the joint apprenticeship committee to alternatively sign an apprenticeship agreement instead of the employer or program sponsor for apprenticeship programs under the CDAP, but prohibits a CDAP apprenticeship program from being signed by an organization of employees.
30. Makes technical and conforming changes to various sections of the Labor Code for these purposes.
31. Defines the following terms:
32. “Appointing power” to mean a person or group having authority to make appointments to positions in the state civil service, as defined in existing law.
33. “Board” to mean the State Personnel Board, as defined in existing law.
34. “California Apprenticeship Council,” as defined in existing law.
35. “Career development apprentice” or “apprentice” to mean: (i) a person at least 16 years of age who has entered into a written agreement called an “apprentice agreement” with an employer or program sponsor, and for which the term of the apprenticeship for each apprenticeable occupation must be approved, as prescribed; and, (ii) is an applicant who meets standardized, job-related criteria, as defined by department rule, who participates in a competitive selection process for admittance to the program, but does not meet the minimum qualifications in the classification specification for permanent appointment to the classification.
36. “Department” to mean the CalHR.
37. “Division of Apprenticeship Standards,” as defined in existing law.
38. “Interagency Advisory Committee on Apprenticeship,” as defined in existing law.
39. “Joint apprenticeship committee” to mean an apprenticeship committee composed of an equal number of employer and employee representatives that perform certain prescribed functions.
40. Includes legislative findings and declarations for these purposes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes that it is the public policy of this state to encourage the utilization of apprenticeship as a form of On-the-Job Training (OJT), when training is cost-effective in developing skills needed to perform public services. State and local public agencies shall make a diligent effort to establish apprenticeship programs for apprenticeable occupations in their respective workforces.

In furtherance of this policy, public agencies must take into consideration (a) the extent to which a continuous supply of trained personnel is readily available to public agencies to meet their skills requirements in the various occupations which are determined to be apprenticeable, and (b) the application of established programs in the private sector, where appropriate. Public sector apprenticeship programs should be fully compatible with affirmative action goals for the participation of minorities and women in apprenticeship programs.^[1]

1. Establishes “Other OJT Programs,” in which these programs apply only when voluntarily requested by the parties to a collective bargaining agreement or by an employer, an employer’s association, or a union, or its representative where there is no collective bargaining agreement, and it must not be construed to compel, regulate, interfere with, or duplicate the provisions of any established programs that are operated under the terms of any collective bargaining agreements or unilaterally by any employer or bona fide labor union, among other provisions.

Further, the California Apprenticeship Counsel and the Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS), in cooperation with the Department of Education, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges are authorized to foster and promote OJT programs other than apprenticeship programs, subject to certain specified criteria.^[2]

1. Establishes “Preapprenticeship Programs,” in which the DAS must develop a process to approve preapprenticeship programs for purposes of establishing eligibility for any state programs, among other provisions.^[3]
2. Authorizes the establishment of an apprentice agreement through collective bargaining between employers and employees setting up higher apprenticeship standards, and that neither existing law or approved apprentice agreement can operate to invalidate any apprenticeship provision in a collective bargaining agreement, subject to existing being rendered invalid, as provided.^[4]
3. Creates the state civil service that includes every officer and employee of the State except a limited number of specified, exempted officers and employees. Existing law also requires that the state make “permanent appointment and promotion in the civil service under a general system based on merit ascertained by competitive examination.” Case law and custom refer to this provision as the merit principle and it governs the administration of the state’s civil service system.^[5]
4. Establishes the State Civil Service Act to facilitate the operation of the Constitution’s merit principle for the state civil service; requires the SPB to prescribe rules consistent with a merit based civil service system to govern appointments classifications, examinations, probationary periods, disciplinary actions, and other matters related to the SPB’s authority under Article VII of the California Constitution; authorizes the SPB to conduct audits and investigations of the personnel practices of CalHR and appointing authorities to ensure compliance with civil service policies, procedures, and statutes, and permits the CalHR and the SPB to delegate, share, or transfer between them responsibilities for programs within their respective jurisdictions pursuant to an agreement.^[6]
5. Establishes, pursuant to Sections 2 and 3 of Article VII of the California Constitution, the SPB which must enforce civil service statutes, and by majority vote of all its members, prescribe probationary periods and classifications, adopt other rules authorized by statute, and review disciplinary actions. In addition, the Executive Officer of the SPB is required to administer civil service statutes under the rules of the SPB.
6. Creates the CalHR and vests it with the powers, duties, and authorities necessary to operate the state civil service system pursuant to Article VII of the California Constitution, the Government Code, the merit principle, and applicable rules duly adopted by the SPB.^[7]
7. Requires the CalHR and the SPB to enter into a memorandum of understanding to determine areas of compliance for nonmerit-related audits and to train SPB staff on the areas of compliance.^[8]
8. Requires the SPB to establish minimum qualifications for determining the fitness and qualifications of employees for each class of position, among other things, and authorizes the CalHR to require applicants for examination or appointment to provide documentation as it deems necessary to establish the applicants’ qualifications.^[9]
9. Authorizes the CalHR to designate an appointing power to design, announce, or administer examinations for the establishment of employment lists as specified. Existing law also permits a designated appointing power to contract with the CalHR or another designated appointing power for the purpose of designing, publicizing, or administering an examination.^[10]
10. Permits an appointing power, or its authorized representative, to take adverse action against an employee for one or more of causes for discipline, as specified.^[11]
11. Permits the CalHR and the SPB to delegate, share, or transfer between them responsibilities for programs within their respective jurisdictions pursuant to an agreement.^[12]
12. Requires all appointing authorities of state government to establish an effective program of upward mobility, as provided.^[13]
13. Permits an appointing power, or its authorized representative, to take adverse action against an employee for one or more of causes for discipline as specified.^[14]
14. Provides for administration of apprenticeships and preapprenticeships, and among other things, establishes the composition, authorities, and duties of the California Apprenticeship Council within the DAS.^[15]

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is flagged as fiscal by Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

1. Dual Referral

The committee is informed that this bill also is referred to the Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment.

1. Brief History of the SPB and the CalHR

Established in 1934 by the California Constitution, the SPB was created to administer the civil service system and ensure that state employment is based on merit and free from political patronage.

Since that time, as the state’s population increased and its economy expanded, so too have the demands for services, including the variety thereof provided by the state, as well as the growth of the state’s civil service workforce. This is evidenced by the number of agencies, departments, boards, and commissions that have been established to provide respective, specialized services to the public.

The SPB’s roles and responsibilities continue with respect to the civil service system, and the SPB oversees the merit-based, job-related recruitment and selection process for the hiring of state employees, reviews disciplinary and merit related appeals, establishes civil service laws, rules and policies, conducts departmental audits to ensure compliance with the merit system, and investigates and adjudicates alleged violations of civil service laws filed by employees, applicants, and members of the public. The California Constitution provides the SPB with quasi-judicial powers to review disciplinary actions and acts in an adjudicatory capacity. As such, the SPB acts much like a trial court would in an ordinary judicial proceeding and makes factual findings and exercises discretion on matters within its jurisdiction.^[16]

As of July 1, 2012, all nonmerit functions of the SPB moved to the CalHR pursuant to Governor Reorganization Plan 1. Among other responsibilities, and for those most relevant to the purposes of this measure, the CalHR is responsible for:

a) Labor relations, and represents the Governor as the employer, in employer-employee relations pursuant to the Dills Act, including collective bargaining with the state’s twenty-one collective bargaining units.

b) Personnel management, which the CalHR administers the state’s classification plan, salaries, and manager and supervisor program, among other programs related to personnel.

c) Creating and administering the state’s civil service exam to provide a fair and open process to hire qualified candidates to serve the state.

1. State Apprenticeship Programs

The internet website of the DAS within the DIR states that, “DIR’s DAS is responsible for the development, maintenance and registration of the state’s apprenticeship programs in all industries including construction and building, firefighting, information technology, health care, civil service/public sector, and advanced manufacturing. (Emphasis added.)

“Registered apprenticeships help employers cultivate loyal teams in a fraction of the time it would take typically due to the earn-and-learn model. Apprentices receive theoretical study and OJT at the same time to prepare and certify them to meet specific needs upon program completion. Other significant benefits to registered apprenticeships include reduced rates of turnover, improved morale, more ease in succession planning, and a more diverse workforce…,” to name a few.

1. The Existing DAS Administration of Apprenticeship and Preapprenticeship Programs and Delineation of Duties Between the DAS and CalHR Regarding the CDAP

Although this bill would establish the CDAP to be administered by the CalHR, the DAS is responsible for the development, maintenance and registration of the state’s apprenticeship programs in all industries including civil service/public sector, among others, as previously stated. (Emphasis added.)

It is acknowledged that this bill defines the DAS by reference to existing law, and makes changes to those laws with respect to the duties of Chief of the DAS. Nevertheless, its provisions provide that the CalHR has primary jurisdiction to administer the CDAP, including, but not limited to, referring program participants to departments.

1. This Bill: Duplication or Supplanting of Existing Intents, Purposes, or Efforts?

The goals of the author to address “persistently high vacancy rates in certain designated classifications, and to facilitate broader access to civil service careers by eliminating barriers to employment,” as stated in this bill are, indeed, laudable.

Apprenticeship programs offer many individuals a direct opportunity to obtain necessary skills, experience, or educational requirements to overcome barriers to employment, and an ability to become increasingly competitive in the employment market. Participation in such programs provide an alternate avenue to obtaining gainful employment in both the public and private sectors.

1. Other OJT Programs

As previously stated under “Existing Law,” the state’s policy regarding apprenticeships and preapprenticeships includes those within the public sector for state and local agencies. Moreover, existing law also provides for “Other OJT Programs,” in which these programs apply only when voluntarily requested by the parties to a collective bargaining agreement or by an employer, an employer’s association, or a union.

1. Other Examples of Existing State Apprenticeship Programs

In 2017, the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 1000 worked to launch a Licensed Vocational Nurse-to-Registered Nurse apprenticeship program that offers upward mobility to State Bargaining Unit 20 (Medical and Social Services) healthcare workers at California Correctional Health Care Services.

Through a joint and collaborative effort between SEIU Local 1000, the state Governmental Operations Agency, the CalHR, Employment Development Department, California Tax and Fee Administration, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Department of State Hospitals, California State Lottery, Department of Industrial Relations, and American River College, a financial services apprenticeship program with concentrations in auditing and accounting was established, also to provide upward mobility opportunities in occupations that have significant shortages.

In addition, in another collaborative effort between SEIU Local 1000 and the Government Operations Agency, the California Department of Technology, the DAS, IBM, and American River College, an information technology apprenticeship program was established that focuses on help desk and client services, mainframe computing technology, cybersecurity, and networking.

As discussed above, given that existing state resources may be used for similar CDAP purposes, and that the state has engaged in the establishment of various apprenticeship programs through collaboration without a need for what is proposed by this bill, this bill may be viewed as unnecessary, especially when considering current state budgetary constraints. However, it is also acknowledged that perhaps, the CDAP may be necessary to help streamline the establishment of future apprenticeship programs that target new employees through the CalHR for purposes of efficiency, efficacy, and consistency in administration, as it is the primary human resources department for the state. (Emphasis added.)

It is worth noting that the provisions of this bill define “joint apprenticeship committee” and include provisions relating to its roles. Given the immediate discussion, “Other Examples of State Apprenticeship Programs,” and recognizes that employee organizations and their representatives also help to recruit individuals to the state civil service, these provisions recognize their role and experience in these regards by including them in the joint apprenticeship committee in a manner that may be beneficial to the state, current employees, prospective employees, and ultimately, taxpayers, and that may likely yield tangible and positive results.^[17]

1. Supplanting or Converting Existing Vacant Positions for Purposes of the CDAP?

It is acknowledged that one of the several core components of an apprenticeship program is that, generally, participation in such programs and occupying a “position” within a program, is temporary. However, to the extent that the positions needed to implement and effectuate the proposed statute’s provisions are converted from permanent to temporary for the CDAP, this bill may be viewed as supplanting existing (vacant) civil service employment positions in favor of temporary positions. As such, questions arise as to whether those positions, if converted as such, will remain in perpetuity (or as long as the CDAP program exists or is operational, if it is extended beyond July 1, 2032) as temporary positions; thereby, reducing the total number and availability of permanent full- or part-time positions in the state civil service in future years.

Appreciably, give the current fiscal status of the state budget and a freeze on filling vacancies, the creation of new positions for the CDAP may require additional moneys for these purposes. Alternatively, if existing positions are converted for CDAP purposes, this removes the potential that such vacancies could be filled by existing qualified candidates who immediately meet the minimum prerequisites for present appointment.

1. Integrity in the Selection of CDAP Candidate Participation: The Appeals Process

The state’s civil service system, also commonly referred to as the “Merit System,” was previously discussed under “Existing Law.” In sum, the purpose of the merit system is to ensure a fair, just, and equitable system for state civil service appointment that is void of hiring and promotional considerations and decisions based on political affiliation, favoritism, nepotism, and other questionable employment practices relating to state civil service appointment that existed prior to establishment of the merit system.

Among its provisions, this bill requires the CalHR or its designee to conduct competitive examinations in the form of CDA cohorts to determine the qualifications and readiness of CDA evaluations and appeals of disputes resulting from actions regarding the CDAP. While the CDAP is proposed to provide an alternative to the traditional state civil service examination and appointment process, it is noted that these provisions may be viewed as being aligned with the “spirit and intent” of the merit system principles to promote fairness, equity, and provide a just method regarding the CDAP to guard against participation considerations and decisions based on political affiliation, favoritism, nepotism, and other questionable employment practices regarding participation in the program.

1. Need to Ensure Transparency, Accountability, and Others: Legislative Monitoring: Proposed Amendments by the Committee

To ensure: (i) transparency and accountability with regard to the implementation and operation of this new program; (ii) that certain stakeholders, indeed, have/had opportunities to engage in those efforts; (iii) that this new program is utilized in a manner to augment, not usurp or undermine, the traditional civil service examination process; and, (iv) that this new program is not utilized in a manner as a constant “revolving door” of sorts by the state that would increase its reliance on temporary employees performing the duties of permanent employees, the committee is proposing the following generally-described amendments to monitor the progress and outcomes of this new program.

Further, because it is highly likely that the proposed CDAP will have outcomes and effects on state agencies, program participants, costs to the state, vacancy rates, and services provided to the public, or on Dills Act collective bargaining efforts, to name a few, this committee and the Legislature must maintain its constitutional oversight role over the executive branch in these regards through monitoring for potential statutory adjustments that may be necessary in the future.

1. Require the CalHR, on June 30, 2026, and annually thereafter, to submit a report to the Legislature and post the same on its internet website regarding substantive qualitative and quantitative outcomes for the program that are consistent with various provisions in the proposed statute.
2. Include a provision that explicitly states that the CDAP is only to be used to effectuate its stated purposes, and not as a means of usurping the existing state civil service examination and hiring process.
3. Include a provision that the CDAP is not to be used to interfere with, or undermine, collective bargaining relations with respect to wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of employment under the Dills Act governing state employer-employee relations.
4. For purposes to ensure inclusive consistency, make clarifying changes to ensure that certain decisions are made with the joint apprenticeship committee, and not unilaterally by the CalHR.
5. Clarify that certain agreements regarding the CDAP are prohibited from solely being signed by an employee organization representative.
6. Conflict Notice to the Author

The author is informed that the Office of Legislative Counsel has issued a conflict notice regarding this bill and Assembly Bill 694 (Gipson, 2024). A conflict exists when two or more bills and/or constitutional amendments amend, add, repeal, or amend and renumber the same section, article, chapter, divisions, title, or heading. The enactment of these measures in their present form could give rise to a serious legal problem that may be avoided by additional appropriate amendments.

As such, to prevent this from occurring, the author is advised to address this matter with appropriate amendments in the future.

1. Statement by the Author

“Apprenticeship is a time-tested education and employment model that allows learners to earn money and benefits while acquiring valuable skills, experience, and education, and provides employers with staff needed to get the job done. This legislation will not only support the Governor’s goal of California for All and the creation of more internship opportunities in California but it will create broader candidate pools and equitable pathways while helping to fill the state’s most persistently high vacancy rate classifications and the need for qualified workers. These pathways will be available to current state employees and any Californian looking to enter into well-paying state careers.”

1. Comments by Supporters

None on file.

1. Comments by Opponents

None on file.

1. Prior or Related Legislation

Senate Bill 943 (Ochoa Bogh, 2024) proposes to require the CalHR, on or before January 1, 2026, to review the department Personnel Classification Plan and identify which classes are compatible with creating a waiver for a bachelor’s degree requirement for a veteran, as defined and provided, among other provisions. This bill is currently pending in the Senate Committee on Labor, Public Employment and Retirement.

Assembly Bill 1493 (W. Carrillo, 2023) proposed to establish the CDAP, administered and overseen by the CalHR, to provide an alternative to the traditional civil service examination appointment process, among other provisions. This bill was held in the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement at the request of the author.

Assembly Bill 1693 (Bauer-Kahan, 2023) proposed to eliminate a college degree as a minimum qualification in the state civil service for positions that do not require an associated required accreditation, unless the state agency can justify the need for the degree, among other provisions. This bill was held in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

None on File.

Opposition

None on File.

Analysis Prepared by: Michael Bolden / P. E. & R. / (916) 319-3957

1. Section 3075.1 of the Labor Code. ↑

2. Sections 3093, inclusive, of the Labor Code. ↑

3. Sections 3100, inclusive, of the Labor Code. ↑

4. Sections 3086 and 3088 of the Labor Code. ↑

5. Sections 1 and 4, art. VII, Cal. Const. ↑

6. Sections 18500 et seq. of the Government (Gov.) Code. ↑

7. Sections 18500, et seq., ibid. ↑

8. Section 18502 (b) (2) of the Gov. Code. ↑

9. Section 18931 (a), of the Gov. Code. ↑

10. Section 18930.5, inclusive, ibid. ↑

11. Section 19574, inclusive, of the Gov. Code. ↑

12. Section 18502 (c) of the Gov. Code. ↑

13. Sections 19400 through 19402 of the Gov. Code. ↑

14. Section 19574 of the Gov. Code. ↑

15. Sections 3070 et seq. of the Labor Code. ↑

16. Almeida v. State Personnel Bd. (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 46, Larson v. State Personnel Bd. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 26, and Lorimore v. State Personnel Bd. (1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 183. ↑

17. “Jobs Sit Empty in the Public Sector, So Unions Help Recruit.” New York Times, July 27, 2023. ↑