AgdaPkt 2002-09-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

- The proponents argued in public that this lagisla- The Constitutional Issue tion was needed to prevent employers from coercing public employees to donate to programs that may or The legislation also prohibits payroll deductions may not be in the employee's best interest. The real for employees of local government agencies for a reason behind this legislation was to stop the non- political action committee, unless the payroll deduc- profit arm of the League, A~Jon for Better Cities tion program is authorized in a collective bargaining (ABC), from secudng voluntary contributions from agreement. This language in the bill permits public city employees so that ABC can better pursue the employees in collective bargaining units with union League's goal of improving and stabilizing city representation to make cont~butions through payroll finances, deductions to a political action committee; but it would prohibit employees in the came jurisdiction The League is seeking a veto of both SB 905 and from making contributions to a political action com- AB 1243. The bills create two problems: 1) practical mittee through peyro(I deducitons if they are not in a problems related to the administration of payroll collective bargaining unit and do not have union deduction programs; and, 2) possible constitutional representation. problems related to the ability of public employees to express their political beliefs through payroll deduc- Under this dual standard, city managers, depart- tions to political causes, merit heeds and other typically unrepresented employees appear to be denied a common and The basis of the League's opposition is focused time-tested avenue (payroll deductions) to exercise on Section 2 of the bill that amends Section 1158 of their 1 ,t Amendment right of free speech. the Government Code. The new language in this section added by SB 905 reads as follows: The Process _ "(b) The provisions of this article are of One of the unfortunate issues surrounding SB statewide interest and concern and are intended 905 and AB 1243 is the process this legislation wont to occupy the field of salary and wage deduc- through to get to the Govemor's Desk. SB 905 was tions for public employees. No local jurisdiction amended on August 27. less than 4 days before the shall establish payroll deduction programs, end of the session. After pointing out a number of except as permitted by this article." problems in the odginal legislation, the proponents of the measure hasitly amended yet another proposal, The Practical Problem AB 1243 0Niggins, Santa Rosa), to correct some of the more obvious problems with SB 905. The direct impact of this language is to prohibit any payroll deduction program unless the program is AB 1243 was amended on August 29, less than specifically authorized in the a~cle of law where this two days before the end of the session. amendment is made (Article 6, Sections 1150 - 1158, Government Code). This raises the practical The final versions of SB 905 and AB 1243 were problem with the legislation. There are a wide vadety never heard in any policy or fiscal committee. The of payroll deduction programs that ara offered as a only real debate on the bills occurred on the floor of service by local government agencies to their the Assembly on the last night of the session. The employees that would be prohibited under this law. In bills were passed about 10 minutes before the one community, the language appears to jeopardize midnight deadline. This did not permit the public a voluntary payroll deduction program to pay the debate that is needed to correct problems. Indeed, health care benefits of the surviving family of a we believe that many of the issues could have been firefighter killed in the line of duty. addressed in a public process, but the proponents were not interested in a public debate. Continued on Page 7 Visit the League's Official Web Site-www.cacities.org PRIORITY FOCUS/PAGE 3