Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights (POBOR)

AB 398 (Fox) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 15, 2013

Assembly Bill 398, by Assembly Member Steve Fox, would add coroners and deputy coroners under the protection of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (POBOR). POBOR contains procedures to be followed whenever any public safety officer is subject to investigation for alleged misconduct which may result in punitive action.

Under existing law, such protection under POBOR is afforded to peace officers, including all city police, deputy sheriffs, court marshals, district attorney investigators, California Highway Patrol, university police, state regulatory investigators, park rangers, housing authority police, community college and school district police, port and transportation officers, public utility security officers, and parole and state correctional officers. AB 398 would include coroners and deputy coroners within the definition of “peace officer” for purposes of POBOR.

AB 398 will be heard in the Assembly Public Safety Committee on April 2.

SB 388 (Lieu) – Oppose
As Introduced on February 20, 2013

Senate Bill 388, by Senator Ted Lieu, would expand protections under POBOR to those officers who are subject to interrogation, but not formally under investigation. The bill also changes “investigation” to inquiry in several sections. CSAC is opposed to SB 388 for several reasons, including, that the bill would subject nearly any question or discussion with an officer to the procedures under POBOR, making it extremely difficult to manage the day-to-day operations of a safety department.

SB 388 is awaiting a hearing date in the Senate Public Safety Committee.

Employee Rights

AB 729 (Hernandez) – Request for Comment
As Introduced on February 21, 2013

Assembly Bill 729, by Assembly Member Roger Hernandez, would provide union agents with evidentiary privilege to refuse to disclose confidential information acquired from communication between them and a represented employee. The bill defines “union agents” as elected union officials and employees of a union who handle contract negotiations or grievance representation.

Current law provides such privilege to physician-patient, lawyer-client, domestic violence victim-counselor, sexual assault victim-client, human trafficking victim-caseworker and clergyperson-penitent communication. 

AB 729 is awaiting a hearing date in the Assembly Judiciary Committee.

AB 1181 (Gray) – Oppose
As Introduced on February 22, 2013

Assembly Bill 1181, by Assembly Member Matt Gray, would require local public agencies to provide paid leaves of absence to public agency employee representatives of recognized employee organizations when they are participating in the following activities:

• Formally meeting and conferring with public agency representatives within the scope of representation.
• Testifying, participating or representing the employee organization in conferences, hearings or other proceedings before the Public Employment Relations Board in matters relating to charges filed against the public agency by the employee organization.
• Testifying, participating or representing the employee organization at personnel and merit commission hearings, city council meetings and labor management committee hearings.

AB 1181 would also require that the employee organization being represented provide reasonable notification to the employer requesting a leave of absence.

Counties will recall that CSAC opposed an early version of AB 1203 (Chapter 804, Statutes of 2012) − which was substantially similar to AB 1181 − on the grounds that while it provided that the employee organization must give reasonable notification to the employer requesting the paid leave of absence when possible, it significantly expands paid leaves of absence allowances that are often provided for in collective bargaining agreements or determined at the local level. 

AB 1181 is awaiting a hearing date in the Assembly Public Employees, Retirement and Social Security Committee.