---

From: CASE@calattorneys.org
To: CASE@calattorneys.org
Sent: 10/8/2010 2:45:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time
Subj: Bargaining Update

October 8, 2010

Dear Member of Bargaining Unit 2:

The CASE Bargaining Team has been in negotiations with the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) for a successor MOU for more than three years, ever since our last MOU expired.  Over the last six months in particular, the team has had multiple formal table dates and informal meetings with DPA representatives.  During this time, the Governor transformed the bargaining process so that now more than ever before, decisions about contract negotiations were being made from within the Governor’s office, not by DPA.  Recently, after many months of bargaining in good faith with DPA, CASE was informed by DPA that they had not been given any bargaining authority by their principals.

While CASE continued to try to bargain in good faith, the Legislature continued to deal with a budget that was later than any budget previously on record, and which needed to close a $19 billion deficit.  Because state employee compensation is necessarily part of the budget, the MOU talks essentially transformed into a three-way negotiation between CASE, the Governor’s office, and the Legislature.

That changed on Monday of this week.  In response to a telephone call from DPA over the weekend, a hastily-convened meeting took place between DPA officials and members of the CASE Bargaining Team.  For the first time, DPA had been given authority to make a proposal in response to CASE’s various prior proposals.  DPA outlined a proposal that was similar in some respects to the deal that SEIU ultimately reached later in the week.  DPA officials were unsure about how certain aspects of the deal would impact some of the unique concerns of CASE members, and indicated they would get back to us when they had more information from their principals.

That same day, the California Supreme Court rendered its decision on furloughs, which changed the dynamic for all parties to the negotiations, because it put the authority to furlough squarely in the hands of the Legislature.  Once the Legislature decided to hold a budget vote on Thursday, both the Legislature and the Administration decided to focus on negotiating a deal for SEIU, because its size (95,000 members) is such that any deal would have a significant budgetary impact.  SEIU reached a deal late Wednesday night/early Thursday morning, and then began hurried preparations for drafting a budget trailer bill to ratify their MOU. 

While that was going on, the CASE Bargaining Team was engaged in around-the-clock negotiations with the Legislature and the Administration in an effort to determine whether the Administration had any responses to the questions we had raised.  Representatives of the other bargaining units who still do not have contracts were also meeting with legislative officials.  Additionally, there were joint meetings with all the unions, as well as numerous individual meetings between CASE and various leaders of both houses of the Legislature.  Obviously each bargaining unit had its own areas of concern, and in the course of mustering enough votes for a budget, few if any of those concerns were answered.  As a result, none of the other units, including CASE, reached even a tentative deal with the Governor.

As you probably have heard, the Legislature was in session all day from Thursday non-stop until Friday morning at about 8:00 a.m., when the Senate finally passed the last piece of the budget package.  Most of the budget bills were voted on in the early morning hours without ever being in print.   Various procedural maneuvers were employed to get the requisite votes for various components of the package.  Notably, with respect to the pension reform bill (which would roll back pension benefits for new hires), it became clear that there were not enough votes to get the 2/3 majority needed for passage of the trailer bill.  The Legislature then convened a special session, converted the bill to a majority vote bill, and rushed it through both houses at about 5:30 a.m. on Friday.   Assuming the Governor signs it, it will take effect in 90 days.  As most CASE members know, that pension reform was something the Governor has been insisting on both in budget negotiations and at the bargaining table.

Many members have asked how the current furloughs can continue in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling.  The short answer is simply that the Governor concluded that because the opinion is not final for 30 days, he did not have to abide by it.  The practical reality is that he was counting on the Legislature authorizing the furloughs again in this budget, just as the Supreme Court found they had done in earlier budgets.  An early draft of the budget control language contained language that was very similar to the language relied upon by the Supreme Court in deciding that the Legislature had authorized furloughs, and may in fact grant broader authority to the Governor than the original language.   Once the final version is in print, the CASE Board and legal team will analyze the budget control language to determine what options may be available. 

Members have also inquired about the “third furlough day” in the last round of furloughs which ended June 30, 2010.  While the Supreme Court only addressed the first two furlough days, it appears that in July 2009, after the Governor instituted the third furlough via executive order, the Legislature passed a “budget revision” bill which employed budget control language identical to that relied upon by the Court to justify the first two furlough days.  The CASE legal team is reviewing that budgetary language to determine what options are available.   

CASE’s General Counsel, CASE's chief negotiator, and CASE’s lobbyist were at the Capitol numerous times every day this week and all day and night on Thursday and Friday, working to protect CASE's interests.  The Bargaining Team met up to two to three times a day this week to explore every possible avenue in which to strike a deal which would minimize the financial impact of a new budget deal on Unit 2 members.  While the budget negotiations have concluded, the CASE bargaining team will continue to negotiate for a successor contract.  It is important to note that the passage of the budget does not mean that MOU negotiations are over.  In fact, the Dills Act contemplates that MOU negotiations will occur independent of the legislative process.  However, it is also a fact that the SEIU “template” deal represents the general contours of the type of MOU that is acceptable to the Governor and the Legislature.  As such, CASE will continue to work toward securing a contract that is fair to the members of Bargaining Unit 2.  

If you have any questions or comments, please direct them to info@calattorneys.org.  Please note that given our limited resources combined with the extraordinary amount of time and effort we are devoting to bargaining and the budget situation, you may experience a delay in receiving a response to your message.  However, your comments are most welcome, and will be forwarded to the full CASE Board of Directors.

We will continue to bring you updates as information becomes available.  As always, your support of CASE and your colleagues in Bargaining Unit 2 is greatly appreciated. 

Sincerely,

The CASE Board of Directors