The Third District Court of Appeal on May 28 rejected an attempt by Attorney General Jerry Brown and the union representing lawyers in his office to get a court-ordered pay raise.
At issue in California Attorneys v. Arnold Schwarzenegger is whether the courts should step in to raise the salaries of Department of Justice lawyers because they are paid less than other public- and private-sector lawyers, and they have been unable to secure raises under the collective-bargaining process outlined in the State Employer-Employee Relations Act.
The lawyers asked the court to order the Department of Personnel Administration to adopt a pay parity formula or to base compensation on a "meaningful salary survey."
This request previously was rejected by a Sacramento Superior Court judge, and the appellate court agreed, calling the proposal a "radical remedy." The court said that rather than going around the collective-bargaining process and the Legislature, it will "await a creative resolution of the wage crisis, if any, by the Legislature or by the people through the initiative process." (Cal-Tax: We would love to see the campaign commercials in support of an initiative to increase government lawyers' pay!)
Justice Vance W. Raye wrote the opinion, and Presiding Justice Arthur G. Scotland and Justice M. Kathleen Butz concurred.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Scotland noted that Mr. Brown was a zealous supporter of the collective-bargaining process as a candidate for governor in 1974, and the judge included several historical quotes from Mr. Brown lauding passage of a bill to authorize collective bargaining. Now, the judge noted, Mr. Brown argues that the process has failed to such a degree that his office faces a "compensation crisis which undermines public service and threatens the ability of the Attorney General to uniformly and adequately enforce the law."
"This litigation falls under the category of 'be careful what you ask for,'" Justice Scotland wrote. In a footnote, he also added: "Generally speaking, the written work and the oral advocacy done in this court by lawyers in the Attorney General's office does not reflect a lack of competence or lack of motivation to perform well, as suggested by their labor union."
Cal-Taxletter, May 29, 2009
© 2009 California Taxpayers'
Association.
All Rights Reserved.