California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1651

Introduced
2/17/17  
Introduced
2/17/17  
Refer
3/16/17  
Refer
3/16/17  
Report Pass
4/18/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Report Pass
6/26/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Chaptered
10/13/17  
Chaptered
10/13/17  
Passed
10/13/17  

Caption

Community colleges: academic employees: involuntary administrative leave.

Impact

The implications of AB 1651 extend to the operational procedures within community colleges, fundamentally altering how allegations against academic staff are handled. By imposing a timeline on notification and investigation, the bill aims to protect the rights of academic employees while fostering a more structured response to misconduct. Colleges are required to conclude their investigations and initiate disciplinary proceedings within 90 days of placing an employee on involuntary leave, promoting prompt resolution of allegations. This requirement holds institutions accountable for timely action and respects employees' rights to due process, aligning with labor regulations.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1651 establishes regulations regarding the involuntary paid administrative leave of academic employees within California community colleges. The bill mandates that an employee must be informed of the general nature of any allegations against them at least two business days before being placed on such leave. This procedure ensures that employees are aware of the accusations they face and can prepare accordingly. In cases where immediate action is necessary due to a risk of physical danger, these notifications can be waived, though the employee must be informed within five business days following placement on leave.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1651 has generally been supportive, particularly from advocacy groups focused on employee rights and transparency within academic institutions. Proponents argue that the bill enhances protections for educators, enabling a fair process in sensitive situations. Conversely, there may have been concerns from some administrative bodies regarding the implications of mandated timelines, particularly in cases that require thorough investigations or those that may involve accusations of a serious nature. The bill reinforces the necessity of balancing employee rights with institutional accountability.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the need for flexibility in the event of urgent allegations, where the immediate placement of an employee on administrative leave may be justified. Critics could argue that rigid timelines limit the ability of institutions to adequately investigate and respond to complex cases. Additionally, while the bill seeks to ensure fair treatment of academic employees, there may be concerns about how these procedures affect overall institutional efficiency and governance. Striking a balance between protecting employee rights and ensuring institutional responsiveness remains a crucial topic for ongoing discussion.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB1383

Community colleges: academic employees: involuntary administrative leave.

CA AB2931

Community colleges: academic employees: involuntary administrative leave.

CA SB40

State Bar of California.

CA AB1148

Child support suspension.

IL HB3711

PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT

CA AB3249

State Bar Act: attorneys: discipline: annual membership fee.

CA AB472

Classified school district and community college employees: compulsory leaves of absence: compensation.

OR SB1024

Relating to restrictive interventions.