Employee Rights

AB 325 (Lowenthal) – Oppose Unless Amended
As Amended on June 14, 2011

Assembly Bill 325, by Assembly Member Bonnie Lowenthal, would provide employees (including temporary, seasonal and part-time) a right of up to four days of unpaid bereavement leave for the death of a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, or domestic partner with a three-month time allotment to complete the leave allowance.

AB 325 would pose a problem for In-Home Supportive Services employees who do not work a traditional scheduled work week and because of the guarantee that bereavement leave can be used for up to three months, which is not typical of current leave policies and has the potential to conflict with policies for employees already receiving bereavement leave.

AB 325 will be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on June 27. 

AB 1203 (Mendoza) – Oppose
As Amended on April 27, 2011

AB 1203, by Assembly Member Tony Mendoza, 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.

While AB 1203 provides that the employee organization shall provide 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.

This bill will be heard in the Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 27.

Collective Bargaining

AB 195 (Hernandez) – Oppose
As Amended on June 6, 2011

AB 195, by Assembly Member Roger Hernandez, would codify existing Public Employment Relations Board regulations which set forth under the Meyers-Milias Brown Act (MMBA). AB 195 would additionally expand upon existing regulations by prohibiting public agencies from providing employee organizations with “inaccurate information.” This differs from current unfair labor practice language under the similar Education Employment Relations Act (EERA), which specifies “inaccurate information” as pertaining to financial resources. Additionally, AB 195 will expand the definition of “employee” to include applicants for employment or reemployment for the purposes of the rights and protections afforded to public employees under MMBA.

CSAC opposes AB 195 because it would unnecessarily expand existing PERB regulations and subject employers regulated by MMBA to unfair labor practices that do not apply to employers under EERA.

AB 195 will be heard in the Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 27, 2011.

AB 646 (Atkins) – Oppose
As Amended on May 13, 2011

AB 646, by Assembly Member Toni Atkins, would authorize an employee organization, if a mediator is unable to effect settlement of a contract impasse within 30 days of his or her appointment, to request that the matter be submitted to a factfinding panel. 

The bill would require that the factfinding panel consist of one member selected by each party as well as a chairperson selected by the Public Employment Relations Board or by agreement of the parties. If the matter is not settled within 30 days, AB 646 would require the factfinding panel to make findings of fact and recommend terms of settlement, for advisory purposes only. 

AB 646 would require that these findings and recommendations be first issued to the parties, but would require the public agency to make them publicly available within 10 days after their receipt. The bill would require all costs associated with the factfinding panel to be shared equally by the public agency and employee organization.

AB 646 would prohibit a public agency from implementing its last, best, and final offer until at least 10 days after the factfinders’ written findings of fact and recommended terms of settlement have been submitted to the parties and the agency has held a public hearing regarding the impasse.

AB 646 will be heard in the Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 27.

Retirement Benefits

AB 340 (Furutani) – Oppose Unless Amended
As Amended on June 22, 2011

AB 340, by Assembly Member Warren Furutani, would prohibit a variety of payments, including bonus payments, housing allowances, vehicle allowances, and payments for unused vacation, sick leave, or compensatory time off, exceeding what may be earned and payable in a 12-month period, from being included in compensation earnable for the purpose of calculating retirement benefits for members of 1937 Act county retirement systems. AB 340 exempts from this prohibition any compensation a member is entitled to under a collective bargaining agreement that was deferred or modified due to a negotiated amendment to the agreement.

AB 340 includes new compensation reporting requirements for counties and authorizes 1937 Act county retirement boards to charge a county for an audit or corrections if a county knowlingly fails to comply with the reporting requirements.

Additionally, AB 340 prohibits a person who retires on or after January 1, 2012, from returning to work as a retired annuitant or as a contract employee for a period of 180 days after retirement.

AB 340 will be heard in the Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 27.

AB 344 (Furutani) – Oppose Unless Amended
As Amended on April 25, 2011

AB 344 would, among other things, would eliminate the ability of a retired annuitant to continue providing services to a public agency that is affiliated with CalPERS beyond 960 hours in a fiscal year. CSAC has maintained the argument that locally-elected officials who manage CalPERS-contracting agencies should determine the employment policies regarding their respective employees and the need for hiring retired annuitants.

AB 344 will be heard in the Senate Public Employment and Retirement Committee on June 27.

AB 1184 (Gatto) – Oppose
As Amended on April 25, 2011

AB 1184, by Assembly Member Mike Gatto, would eliminate reciprocity within the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) by requiring a local public agency that contracts with the CalPERS to pay for any increase in liability that accrues to a previous employer as a result of excessive compensation paid to a non-represented employee by the current public agency. 

The bill defines “excess compensation” as the final compensation of an employee of a contracting agency who previously worked for another contracting agency to the extent the final compensation received from the current contracting agency is in excess of 15 percent of the salary paid by the prior contracting agency.

Additionally, AB 1184 would prohibit CalPERS from administering a replacement benefit plan for a person who first becomes a member of CalPERS on or after January 1, 2013 and has reached the IRC 415(b) limit of 195,000 in retirement benefits that can be paid to them annually by CalPERS.

CalPERS opposes AB 1184 on the grounds that the reciprocity issue is unworkable. Additionally, CSAC is concerned that AB 1184 will force employers to consider the liability associated with a job applicant’s prior service with other contracting agencies when making hiring decisions. Such a change could leave employers vulnerable to charges of discrimination.

Workers’ Compensation

AB 378 – Support
As Amended on May 9, 2011

AB 378, by Assembly Member Jose Solorio, with regulate the use of compounded medications, medical foods and co-packs in the workers’ compensation system. The bill would require the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation to adopt a fee schedule for compounded drug products and specifies that the fee for any of these products prescribed by a physician cannot exceed 120 percent of the physician’s costs.

In a report issued by the Commission on Health and Safety and Workers’ Compensation, it was found that payments for such products has grown substantially and uncertainties about whether the products are medically appropriate and the costs are reasonable exist. The report suggested clarifying rules on when and how compounded medications can be used and adopted a fee schedule to regulate the costs associated with them.

AB 378 will be heard in the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee on June 29.

AB 584 (Fong) – Oppose
As Amended on May 8, 2011

AB 584, by Assembly Member Paul Fong, would require any physician or psychologist who conducts utilization review in workers’ compensation cases to be licensed in the State of California. CSAC and a broad coalition of public employer advocates oppose this measure because it would substantially limit the number of doctors available to perform utilization review services, thereby creating a logjam of cases that need to be reviewed. This limitation would drive up the cost of utilization review services.

AB 584 will be heard in the Senate Labor and Industrial Relations Committee on June 29.