Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances bill codifying confidentiality for employee‑union communications
Summary
AB 340 would make communications between employees and their union representatives confidential and an unfair labor practice for employers to compel disclosure; committee approved and sent the bill to Appropriations after supporters said it codifies PERB case law and opponents raised concerns about investigatory needs and privilege effects.
AB 340 would codify limited protections shielding communications between employees and their union representatives from employer compulsion, enforceable as an unfair labor practice through PERB. Supporters said the bill simply restates existing PERB case law and protects the trust necessary for representation. David Mastagny for PORAC told the committee AB 340 “codifies existing PERB case law to ensure that communications between employees and their union representatives remain confidential.”
Supporters including numerous public‑sector unions argued the absence of statutory clarity leads employers to test the boundaries of PERB precedents and can chill representation. Witnesses described the bill as narrowly drawn: it does not create an evidentiary privilege, does not alter the Evidence Code, and does not apply to criminal investigations; it would be enforceable through PERB.
Opponents — including school administrators, special districts, county groups and PRISM — said the bill goes further than PERB decisions, could hinder legally required administrative investigations, and might act like a discovery privilege without the usual safeguards. Dorothy Johnson of the Association of California School Administrators cited concerns about investigations into child abuse allegations and cases affecting students with disabilities, saying administrative fact‑finding sometimes depends on questioning union representatives and employees.
After debate, the committee moved and passed AB 340 by recorded roll call; the clerk reported the motion passed and referred the bill to the Committee on Appropriations. The committee hearing summary lists the bill as passing the committee by a 6‑0 vote at the time the roll was closed.
Supporters said AB 340 preserves representative advocacy and prevents employer tactics that could chill employee organizers; opponents urged narrower language to preserve investigatory access and guardrails. The bill will be considered next by Appropriations.
