Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to let PERB intervene in public-employer litigation
Summary
AB 672, authored and presented at the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement, would require public employers to notify the Public Employment Relations Board when they file court actions covering statutes PERB administers and would allow PERB to intervene as a party to protect consistent application and enforcement of public‑employee labor protections.
AB 672, authored and presented at the Assembly Committee on Public Employment and Retirement, would require public employers to notify the Public Employment Relations Board when they file court actions covering statutes PERB administers and would allow PERB to intervene as a party to protect consistent application and enforcement of public‑employee labor protections.
The bill’s author told the committee that “public employees are vulnerable and need more protections in the workplace,” listing groups such as childcare providers and teachers as examples of public‑sector workers the measure aims to protect. Sandra Barreiro of SEIU California, the bill’s sponsor, asked the committee for an aye vote and made herself available for questions.
No witnesses registered opposition. Several labor groups stepped forward in support, including AFSCME California and the California School Employees Association. After public testimony and a short discussion, the committee moved and passed the motion to refer AB 672 to the Committee on Judiciary; the clerk recorded sufficient votes and the bill was placed on hold for add‑ons per committee practice.
What the committee recorded as formal action: a motion to pass and refer the bill to the Committee on Judiciary, moved by Assemblymember Nguyen and seconded by Assemblymember Adani. The clerk announced the motion passed and the bill will be referred. The committee then placed the bill on hold for add‑ons per its routine process; the final committee tally recorded in the hearing summary was six ayes with one member (Lackey) not voting.
Supporters said the measure would help maintain consistent enforcement of labor protections across jurisdictions by allowing PERB to know when litigation affecting PERB‑administered statutes is filed and to step in where needed. There was no recorded organized opposition during the hearing.
The bill now goes to the Committee on Judiciary for further consideration; the committee chair also placed it on hold for add‑ons per the clerk’s announcement. More detailed cost, implementation, or legal analyses were not provided at the hearing.
