California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB856

Introduced
2/16/17  
Introduced
2/16/17  
Refer
3/2/17  
Refer
3/2/17  
Report Pass
4/4/17  
Report Pass
4/4/17  
Refer
4/5/17  
Report Pass
4/19/17  
Report Pass
4/19/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Refer
5/3/17  
Failed
2/1/18  

Caption

Public postsecondary education: hiring policy: socioeconomic diversity.

Impact

The implementation of AB 856 is expected to impact the current hiring practices within California's public universities and colleges significantly. The bill requires these institutions to place 'serious consideration' on candidates from geographic areas and socioeconomic backgrounds that are currently underrepresented among their staff. These changes are rooted in the belief that increased diversity among high-level administration will foster an inclusive environment that better serves the diverse student body and community.

Summary

Assembly Bill 856, introduced by Assembly Member Levine and co-authored by Assembly Member Holden, addresses the hiring practices within California's public postsecondary education system. The bill seeks to mandate that, when filling high-profile administrative positions, institutions such as the University of California, California State University, and local community colleges ensure a hiring policy that reflects the geographic and socioeconomic diversity of California's populace. This directive aims to enhance representation among administrative personnel and align their demographics more closely with the state's demographics.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding AB 856 appears to be supportive, particularly among advocates for educational equity and diversity. Proponents argue that this legislation is a critical step towards eliminating barriers to entry for qualified candidates from diverse backgrounds and enhancing the overall governance of educational institutions. Critics, however, may express concerns about the feasibility and effectiveness of such mandates, questioning whether they might inadvertently limit the autonomy of educational institutions in their hiring processes.

Contention

While there is broad support for the bill's objectives, contention may arise regarding the practical implications of enforcing this requirement across various educational institutions. Some opponents might argue that the bill could lead to tokenism or compromise the merit-based hiring process, which may provoke resistance from segments of the educational community who fear that qualifications might be overshadowed by diversity considerations. These tensions highlight the ongoing dialogue about balancing representation with competency in administrative hiring processes.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB418

Elementary and secondary education: Computer Science Education Grant Pilot Program.

CA AB1142

Community colleges: costs for using facilities or grounds.

CA AB130

Postsecondary education: Higher Education Performance, Accountability, and Coordination Commission.

CA AB1918

California Reproductive Health Service Corps.

CA AB2080

University of California: schools of medicine: report.

CA AB2633

Public contracts: county-owned buildings.

CA AB1038

Postsecondary education: higher education policy.

CA SB395

Excise tax: electronic cigarettes: Health Careers Opportunity Grant Program: Small and Rural Hospital Relief Program.