March 25, 2026 · Rules · 10,302 words · 9 speakers · 180 segments
Thank you. Grove here. Jones? I'm here. Jones here. Laird? Here. Laird here. Reyes? Here. Reyes here. Quorum? Thank you. We have established a quorum. If there are no objections, I'd like to take up the first item on today's agendas. Governor, appointments not required to appear, starting with item 2C, the appointment of Armin Meyer, J.D., a Senior Deputy Commissioner of the Division of Consumer Financial Protections, Department of Financial Protection and Innovation. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you to our Vice Chair, Grove. Can we please call the roll on that? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5-0. Thank you. And next, the item is approved 5-0. And the last item for governor's appointments not required to appear, item 2D, Bukadunka, as a member of the California State Lottery Commission. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you to Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5-0. All right. That motion is approved 5-0. Next item I'd like to take up is item 3, reference to bills to committees. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you to our Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5-0. All right. That item is approved. Next on the agenda, we have item four, Rule Ravers' request to suspend SR55 by Senator Ashby to allow guests to be on the Senate floor during session on Monday, April 6th. I'll entertain a motion. Thank you, Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. Five to zero. All right. That item is approved. Five to zero. Our final items before we turn to governor's appointees are items 5 through 14, floor acknowledgements. I'll entertain a motion. All right. Thank you, Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5 to 0. All right. That motion is approved. Those motions are approved. 5 to 0. We'll now return to Governor's Appointees Required to Appear, Item 1A, the appointment of Orrena Ortega as a member of the Public Employment Relations Board. Ms. Ortega, we welcome you to the Senate Rules Committee. You'll have the opportunity to provide one to two minutes for your opening testimony to the committee. In your opening, you're welcome to introduce any guests who you may have here, who may be watching.
and we will be keeping time of your opening and prompt you when you get close to that time thank you for being here You may begin Thank you Thank you Good afternoon Madam Pro Tem and senators Thank you for allowing me to appear today My family could not make it today, but I am joined in the audience by some dear friends and colleagues of many, many years. So I feel a lot of support in the room. So thank you for them being here as well. I want to thank Governor Newsom for appointing me to the Public Employment Relations Board and to the staff of the governor's office who supported me through this process along the way. Additionally, I want to thank my fellow board members at PERB and all the staff, some of whom are here in the room today, who have been so welcoming and so supportive along the way and really have helped bring me up to speed in my role on the board. And I'm just happy to be here today and ready to answer any questions that you might have with me. Thank you.
So we'll begin with our members. We'll start with Vice Chair Grove.
Hi, thank you. Thank you for being, appearing before us today. I just have a few questions.
How does your background and experience, or your work experience particularly, most recent as the director of the California Department of Human Services or CalHR, inform your perspective and approach on decision making for the board? Sure. Thank you, Senator, for the question. I would point to two parts of my background. One is going back to my role at the Department of Finance, where I represented the director on boards and commissions. And really, my full-time job was to attend dozens of board meetings throughout the state, including the CalSTRS board, the State Lands Commission. And then also at CalHR, I was on the CalPERS board. So I have for many, many years served on boards and commissions and have a lot of understanding of the Bagley-Keene rules, certainly, and then just generally how to operate in a board environment with staff recommendations, how to review materials and kind of think about how to make decisions as a board member. And then as it relates to the specific subject area, I think having been both at my time at CalHR, but in previous roles as well, really sort of being responsible for representing an employer perspective and maybe an operational perspective to how things are, how they operate within a public sector employment environment and delivering services to Californians. And so I think I do bring a bit of a bridge of that type of experience as well in terms of thinking about the types of disputes that arise and what employers are trying to do with implementing programs and delivering services, and then, of course, what employee representatives are doing in terms of representing their employees in the process. So I think it's a good mix of experience. So far in my six months on the board, I certainly feel like I have a lot to offer in the conversation and understand the issues before us. Thank you.
So the only other question I have is AB 288 authorized the PERB board to adjudicate unfair labor practices. But there was also that that was recently under the jurisdiction in LRB. But implementation of legislation has already been stayed by court. And so what are your thoughts about and do you anticipate PERB to be able to have to be able to process and implement LM55? Excuse me, 288.
288, yes. Yes. So it is enjoined by the court at this point, and so I would really characterize it as on pause. And if at any point the litigation should change in that matter, then PERB would be ready to implement that law as it was enacted. But at this point, it's enjoined, and so we're not taking any action to move forward on it.
Okay. If it does come back into your field or back into your department, are there responsibilities and workload already divided?
Is there you going to need new employees Yeah I think as the bill was moving through the process the staff completed an analysis of what it might take in order to take on that workload And so I think they would be prepared to put something forward to explain how that might happen But I think until that point it's just theoretical if it should come back to us. As I understand it, again, the bill was moving before I came on the board, but, you know, everyone would be working very closely together, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, BUDGET COMMITTEES, LEGISLATIVE STAFF, ALL OF THAT, IN ORDER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO SHOULD THE STAY BE, SHOULD IT NOT BE ENJOYED ANY LONGER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO GO TO SENATOR RAYES AND THEN I'LL GO TO SENATOR LAIRD.
THANK YOU, MADAM PT. AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH YOU FOR TODAY'S HEARING. You and I spoke a little bit about the SIU letter and the response from PERB, and I wanted to ask you here, SIU sent a letter asking about recusals. Would you tell us why this is an important issue, what your role was with SIU and other workers, and what you intend to do regarding that?
Thank you, Senator Reyes. I appreciated meeting with you as well. Thank you for the question. So the integrity of the board is paramount. And the board members are committed to fairness and transparency in how all matters are handled. And I think that is made very clear in a regulation that the board adopted. It's per regulation 32155. And it addresses recusal directly. directly. So there are a number of things that could come up in the recusal of a board member should they have any kind of conflict of interest, either that they know of or a perception of a conflict of interest, anything along those lines. And there's several components of it, which I'll quickly address. So the first part of the recusal is anyone who comes to the board who previously worked in an organization that would have worked directly with folks who may come before the board, there's an automatic one-year recusal period. So as that relates to me specifically, for one year, I would automatically be recused from anything having to do with state employees covered under the DILS Act or the child care providers coming under the Child Care Bargaining Act. After the one-year period, there continues to be a recusal for any matter in which a member was directly involved. So I would imagine there will be several matters for which I would be permanently recused because I was directly involved in negotiating contracts or developing a policy that applies to the state employees, to the child care providers. After that period, it really becomes a case-by-case matter. As you all know, you could have a conflict of anything that could come up if you're a board member because you have some relationship to something in the matter before you. So you're always looking when you get assigned a case, is there anything here that suggests I should recuse myself? I think there could be a time where you, the board member, don't know that there's a conflict or a perceived conflict. In that case, the regulation also allows any party to file a motion with the board member asking that they recuse themselves and saying, here's why we think that you might have a conflict. And so you can assess that as well. there may be times where parties file requests for recusal that are there's no basis for it and there are different reasons why that might happen if something like that were to happen and the board member decides they don't think they need to recuse themselves then the entire board considers whether that the case or not so I explain this regulation to give you a sense of there a lot of process and structure built in to avoid any kind of conflicts or perception of conflict And at the end of the day, with a full board, which we have today, with me, we would have five members, and the number of other employers that are out there, it will not create any hardship to PERB if I am recused from state employee in child care cases. Thank you.
I really appreciated that discussion yesterday, and I appreciate you providing that information here today. My last question is, why do you want this job?
Oh, thank you. People have asked me that question about this job and other jobs that I've taken as well. I will say that personally, and I've given this advice to many, many people that I've spoken with over the years, I ask myself the question, is something going to be new? Is it going to be challenging? Is it going to be interesting? And if that answer to those questions are yes, I typically like to do something new. So it was the right time for me to think about doing something new, and this opportunity is all of those things for me, and so that's why. Thank you.
And thank you for your answers.
Thank you, Madam Putee.
Thank you, Senator Reyes. Senator Laird.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you for the opportunity to have a thoughtful conversation. My colleagues have asked a lot of things, and I was dying to ask you why you wanted the job too, so I'm glad that that happened. Let me ask two questions then, even though I got up to a couple of them in the discussion. One is, is there had been a backlog of cases, and the agency had really been working to catch up. And so what's the status of that and how do you think it is looking forward?
Sure. Thank you. I appreciate the question. So historically there have been backlogs at PERB. There is not a backlog today. And what I would point to is the work that the board members members and the staff have done internally to address all of the administrative ways that they could change procedures and address issues differently, process cases differently in order to move things along quicker through the system. And so as of today, every case is within target of being through the process within a six-month period. So there is effectively no backlog. Looking forward, I think filings overall are definitely up, and so there's a possibility of pressure on that timeline, that target that the board has going forward. But I think there's such a culture within the board itself and within the staff of monitoring that very, very closely and looking at how can you move resources around. And, you know, in an organization like PERB, things are funneling through a process, right? And so you can see the wave coming. If you have a lot of filings, you know at some point that could mean a lot of appeals before the board. So there's a lot of attention on making sure that a backlog doesn't accumulate again, and instead there are interventions to make sure that everything continues to move on time.
Well, that sort of ties to my other question, which is here comes the enforcement of the ride share piece of this. And so how do you anticipate sort of being able to handle the caseload that will come from that?
Yeah. So the board is planning for that. There is a budget proposal to provide some additional staffing to help support that process. I think, you know, More so with my experience in other departments, but I certainly think it applies here, is when you have something new like that, you have to pay very close attention to what's happening. And if you thought that it were going to be a certain number of cases and it's going to be many, many more, or they're at a complexity level that's taking people a lot longer, you need to address that right away and not let the problem fester until the point where you're looking at long, drawn-out timelines. So I think that'll be really key, is making sure everyone is monitoring very closely. How is it working? Is it what we expected? Is it more? Is it less? And what do we do about that?
Great. I appreciate that because I know that there's a possibility for that given the volume that exists in the rideshare sector. So I really appreciate it. You seem on top of this. I'm amazed at your willingness to do this and look forward to supporting you.
Thank you. Thank you. Senator Jones.
Thank you. I just had maybe a quick question. Maybe not. I'm not exactly sure. But as you know, the legislative staff are in the process of unionizing as passed by law and now in the regulation process. Is this board part of that process? And what can you tell us about how it's going? And is there anything we need to do to be helpful? Or just asking kind of like a general update.
Sure. Sure. Yes. So the act that covers legislative employees is under PERP's jurisdiction. So yes, PERP will be part of that process at some point. The comment period on the regulations actually closed at midnight last night. So we're really right in the middle of finalizing kind of later steps in this process. I'm sure staff are beginning now to review the comments and working with OAL on the comments that came in on the Office of Administrative Law's comments that came in. And if changes are needed, it would go out for another comment period. So, like I said, we're right in the middle of working on that and we'll continue to be. I know the staffs work closely with the staff of the legislature to monitor what's happening there.
So the comment period that closes for public comment, do you have any idea how many public comments you received?
I do not. I'm sorry. It literally was like midnight last night that it closed.
All right. Great. Thank you.
Yeah, but the comments will all be part of that public process and the responses and whatever changes are necessary.
Thank you. And my comments actually were going to be around the recusal piece and also the rideshare industry. But since you've answered those, I will have one just quick question for you that has to do with how often do you think, you know, I don't know if you can quantify maybe like the percentage of time that you think you'd have to recuse yourself given the background. I just didn't get a sense of.
No, we did look at that. Actually, the staff were able to pull the numbers on that. And so over the last three years, DILS Act, so state employee related cases, were 7.3% of the total cases before PERB. So that gave us quite a bit of comfort that there are plenty of other cases. And the way it works in the assignment of cases is it's randomly applied to the next board member. And so they would just skip me and move on and hand me the next case. So it should not have any impact on workload.
Thank you.
So with that, we are going to open it up to any members of the public that would like to come forward and speak in support. This is your opportunity. Maybe.
Madam Pro Tem members Ted Toppin in support for the professional engineers in California government Thank you All right Seeing no other individuals in support
If anybody is in opposition, this is your opportunity to come forward. Seeing nobody else here in opposition or in support, we're going to turn it back to the dais for a motion. Other than one more question, I think this former Secretary of Natural Resources would like to ask. All right. We have another question. Senator Laird?
Well, actually, I was prompted. So do you have any special positions on oil and gas extraction in California?
That's not my policy area, Senator.
With that said, I'd like to move the concrete to the Senate floor for a full vote. Thank you.
So we do have a motion, and that motion was made by Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon?
Aye.
Limon, aye. Grove?
Aye.
Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5-0. Great. That appointment has been approved to move to the full Senate floor for confirmation. Thank you. Thank you and congratulations. Our final item will be the governor's appointee required to appear. Item 1B, the appointment of Monica Erickson as director of the Department of Human Resources. Thank you for joining us, Director Erickson. You'll have the opportunity to provide one to two minutes for your opening testimony to the committee. In your opening, we welcome any introductions of your guests. We will be keeping time of your opening and we'll give you a prompt as you approach that time. You may begin.
Thank you very much, Chair and members of the Senate. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I'd like to briefly acknowledge my aunt and uncle who are in the audience today, both veterans and health care providers whose lifelong service continues to inspire my commitment to public service. I am happy to have them join me today. I am fortunate to have had the opportunity throughout my career to serve in roles that contribute to the public good. Public service is not something that I have ever taken lightly. It is a responsibility and a privilege. Hard work has always been a guiding principle in my life, and I have learned from many talented colleagues and leaders who set a high standard for integrity, dedication, and service. I also want to acknowledge the leaders who have served in the role before me. Their commitment, vision, and hard work laid the foundation for CalHR and the progress we see today. The work we do in public service is never accomplished by one person alone. My CalHR staff are passionate about the mission of CalHR. They are very dedicated, bring expertise, commitment, and a shared sense of purpose to serving the public and state employees every day. I am continually inspired by their dedication. I am proud to work alongside them and could not do this difficult and rewarding work without them. Thank you for your time and consideration, and I welcome any questions. Thank you.
We will begin. Any questions? Vice Chair Grove.
Thank you. Thank you for being here today. Given the projected budget deficit or structural deficit that we have in our budget and the agreements that were reached in 2025 with SEIU, what approach or specific priorities guides your negotiations with SEIU new contracts for 2026 while making sure there a fair and equitable pay but still have long fiscal responsibility for the budget Absolutely So thank you so much for your question We going to continue to work through those procedures and processes obviously
The economic impact of the budget does have a significant impact to what we can provide to our state employees, so we're going to continue to work through that. What I would like to share with you, though, is the state employees did get a pay increase during this round, but it was offset by the personal leave program and the OPEB. They did get a little bump because of the OPEB decrease. In 2027, there is a scheduled increase as well.
Okay. And then as an ex-officio member of CalPERS board, how do you view your role in guiding policies and oversight, and what priorities are you going to focus on?
Absolutely. Well, my priority is obviously to be the fiduciary of the board and to ensure that the decisions that are being made are equitable. for the pension. And I'm just going to continue to ensure that my fiduciary duty is appropriate and that we have a sustainable pension.
When you say sustainable pension, are we underfunded now?
No, I believe we are not, no.
In any way, even covering like cases of health care, I know we calculate out people's wages and they're going to work until 55 or whatever the age is. And then you're like, okay, this person making this much money, working this long is going to cost us this much money if they live to be this age. I know there's those actuarial comments, but my understanding is they don't calculate in health care issues, like how many of those people could possibly have cancer, or we can have the medical benefit resources to be able to pay for that. So just, I was curious.
I'll have to get back to you on that. I'm not exactly sure.
Okay. Thank you.
Yes. I look forward to that.
Thank you.
Next, we'll go to Senator Laird, then Senator Reyes, and then Senator Jones.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you also for the chance to meet. And you appeared in front of us once before for your previous position. And when you did that, you indicated that recruitment, hiring, and retention were the most challenging issues. In the couple of years since then, what progress has been made and what are you targeting to do going forward?
Yes, and I will just say that recruitment, hiring, and retention are always going to be something that I think we're going to have to contend with. And what I'd like to start off with is celebrating the accomplishments that we have made. And obviously, CalHR needs to continue to be innovative and forthcoming in thinking about the current workforce we have today. So we continue to make a variety of improvements. I'll just highlight some of the things that we've done that I believe have helped us reduce the vacancy rate somewhat. We did a huge push for Work for California, a campaign that hadn't been done before. We were all over buses, light rail, and I think that's helped us tremendously. We've also done class consolidations to make classifications easier for individuals to be able to apply. The media helped us tremendously with removal of educational barriers to allow people without degrees to be able to join the state. Cal HR has also done some great work in establishing the EEO Academy, which helps with reasonable accommodations and our equity officers. We've done some great work with statewide engagement. So while we hire people, we want to keep them. And statewide engagement is part of that process where we're offering tools and materials for departments so they can keep the people that they do have. The other thing that I would like to share with you that I done from my chief deputy role is departments seem to always come to CalHR when there a problem where there a fire We really want to be more proactive with our departments As such I set up some HR policy forms and they're actually very helpful for state departments where they can actually, CalHR will pick either a policy or a topic to discuss with them, and they get to kind of have the conversation with us in a setting that's not always so much on fire. And the other thing I wanted to share with you is it's very important. And customer service has really been a huge aspect of the work that I do. To me, it is really important to know what my state departments think about the services that CalHR provides. So I actually submitted a survey to 150 state departments to get their feedback. We've gotten some incredible feedback from that, and we're able to kind of implement those things. So I've got a lot of other great work that I can highlight, but in case there are other questions, maybe I'll save some of that information.
Well, I'm not sure you mentioned the actual stats, because before it was a 20 percent vacancy rate, and you've gone to 17.
Yes, 17.
And you've gone to 17 because of the things that you just described.
Yes, yes. And then what I will tell you is position growth slowed down.
That has allowed us to catch up as well. Interesting. I think Senator Grove is regretting not having asked about that. Just please don't ask me about oil and gas. Well, do you have an opinion?
I do not.
Okay, just checking. Then the other question I had is one of the more lively discussions has been about telework.
Oh, yes.
And so how do you measure productivity in the telework environment? How do you determine that it's actually working?
I would say CalHR's position is not to assist with that process, right? Each state department is going to have to figure out how to measure the activity for how telework is working.
Now, do you mean like productivity with output?
Yes. Yes, it's basically, I would have thought that you would have an overall policy or an overall direction to the departments saying, A, it's our priority to make sure there is good productivity, but sort of here are some tips in how to do it.
You don't do that?
Well, actually, I will step back. When we first moved to a telework environment, there was a training that CalHR put out, and it was, oh, I'm not recalling the name, but a hybrid workplace environment and just giving exactly that, tips and tricks for managers and supervisors to be able to figure out how can we do this in a virtual environment, how can we ensure that there's output happening. And obviously, to me, you'll measure that by the services that we need to provide to our public.
So if we can accomplish that, then we're doing our good job.
And I assume it's just the kind of work that can be subject to telework.
you can't be a park ranger and telework from it. So it's really a...
Absolutely, yes. Yeah.
And you see, one of the reasons I'm asking is I think in the debate over it, there's a contention by a lot of workers that it has improved productivity. And I'm just looking to see if you measure it in a way that you can address that issue.
Yeah, we did not. And really, CalHR's role in all this is we have to engage and provide. We have to – well, let me step back here. CalHR is really here to help navigate and provide departments as much guidance as possible. That's where we step in. Really reminding them – of their policies and regulations that they must follow. I mean, departments ultimately have to figure that out for themselves. They have to figure out how they can get their missions accomplished via telework or in the office.
And, you know, figure that out. We were talking about the fact that, you know, I worked for a personnel department for a few years before I came into the legislature. And we had managers that had to deal with all these complex programs, and they did it without training. And so we did a boot camp on performance evaluation, you know, on ADA, reasonable accommodation, workers' compensation, employee discipline, so that they could do this. and I just didn't know if that is a similar thing that is done through CalHR or it incensed the departments to do, that then allows you to have a measurement of whether or not some of those things are being done effectively.
Yes, and I would say it would be up to the departments to look at that. Just like for CalHR, I will have to determine the services that we're providing. Am I measuring? Are we seeing the outcomes that we need to? So I would say it would be from the health department.
But if it turns out somebody's complaining about a department and you're head of CalHR, how do you determine whether that complaint is valid?
We don't. I mean, that would be a complaint that comes in would have to go to the director of that department. I mean, it depends what the complaint is. So, for example, there are many times we do get some complaints that come in where, you know, I'm not getting my benefits. I got kicked out of Delta Dental or something like that. Then, you know, CalHR will step in and assist the HR shops in those processes.
Hopefully that answers your question. But if there's real problems in employment, employee discipline, and different things that are recurring in departments, that's decentralized to the departments without oversight from you?
So we probably provide policy as much as possible on certain steps and things like that. But ultimately, yes, the department's responsible. For example, we provide progressive discipline training. And then we have other processes and procedures internally at CalHR looking at, for example, unlawful appointments or what are departments doing with their delegation and things like that. So that's where we kind of step in.
Well, one of the interesting things is, and I hesitate, my colleague to one side always hates me referring to my previous job, but we had a situation where somebody that was a receptionist was so mad at everybody one day that she shredded the entire incoming mail for that day. And then we had people say, oh, you can't do anything. And I sort of had to say, well, watch me, because I thought you have to set a standard. And it sounds to me like a lot of that is decentralized.
It is up to individuals in those circumstances to decide how to respond to them. Yes.
Yeah, I would agree. That's kind of concerning, because I would like to think that there was just some overall accountability, not just individually by every individual.
Well, the overall accountability, I would say, is in the progressive discipline process, and that's where we kind of provide guidance. And I will share with you that recently with my colleagues at SPB, we actually did a training a couple of weeks ago, maybe about a month ago, where we kind of have helped individuals. Well, the employees came in one of the HR forums.
Excuse me.
One of the HR forums we actually had a forum that actually discussing what you were talking about So really helping departments kind of trying to understand what their roles are what they can do what they cannot do But the thing would be what I would be trying to convince them
is that you can take action if you don't surrender to what the circumstances are.
Is that part of it?
Progressive discipline, yes. Okay.
Because I think it's really hard for individual supervisors to understand it.
Well, I don't want to say so much. Maybe understand it. It shouldn't be.
There's trainings available to help guide supervisors on this.
But what I find that happens is sometimes when you have a problem employee, it can be very overwhelming for a supervisor. It's very difficult for the supervisor to continue to do their job day to day and now pretty much have a second job trying to move through a progressive discipline process or helping an employee. That's where I think a lot of the struggle is. Well, for example, I had a case when I was in local government where somebody had a medical condition where if they didn't have a certain thing to help their blood sugar, they nearly passed out. They were driving a car. It was a county car. They had on somebody. And it came from that, and the department didn't want to do anything because they thought it was a medical condition. But if they had somebody doing a DUI and crashing a car, they just had established the progressive discipline because you didn't act in one and it didn't allow you to have the even-handed thing to act in another. And it seems to me that's at a level of complexity that unless you do elaborate training so that somebody understands that, they don't know that that's the issue that's at hand. So are you confident that the training on progressive discipline addresses those kinds of issues in a way that it gets that point across to supervisors?
I would hope so. Our progressive discipline is very structured, but some of the other pieces that CalHR offers, for example, are like, to me, that sounded like a reasonable accommodation type of situation. We recently launched our EEO Academy that focuses a little bit more on reasonable accommodations. We're putting out guides and things like that to help departments a little bit more understand. But again, they have to kind of look at their business operations and determine what works best for them.
But you're right.
I mean, they should be knowing what steps to take when they do have an individual, and I believe that our training does that.
Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. No, I would not answer the question. Thank you.
Next we're going to go to Senator Reyes.
I want to push back just a little bit and maybe Senator Laird understood, but I'm still not sure. Where does the buck stop? With progressive discipline or help me understand a little bit more? Where does the buck stop with any issue having to do with human resources?
I'm not sure I understand the question, if you would like.
Who ultimately is responsible for the staff we have working for the state of California?
So I would say we establish policy, but ultimately the departments must be responsible for implementing those policies.
That's what I thought I heard, but it was just kind of strange. I'd like to talk about EIA.
Okay.
What sort of guidance does CalHR give to departments regarding their DEIA coordination? and how are you insulating these important values from the federal government So currently as part of a budget change proposal we did receive some resources for a DEIA unit
And what I will tell you is the DEIA work is grounded in CalHR's strategic plan, which is the foundation for fair and equitable employment environment. But DEIA has been embedded within our services before it was called DEIA. This is more along the lines of civil equity, accessibility, and my management services division. Civil rights, which is what we used to call it before. Today, what CalHR is doing is we are looking at our own policies for any barriers to employment. We look at data that departments give us in their workforce analysis. That gives us a lot of information about a department's workforce composition. That's where we step in and provide support for departments, where if their composition is a little off, we might suggest provide some tools, tips, tricks. The DEIA division that we do have provides a toolkit that we publish monthly to kind of help departments with articles or just tools that they can use and implement in their department. Again, the EEO Academy also touches a little bit on this through a variety of ways. The EEO Academy talks about reasonable accommodation. We also have a limited examination and appointment program that assists in the DEIA process as well. Upward mobility, where if you have low-paying classifications, We have programs to help individuals grow into higher classifications. And I'm going to count on the class consolidations. Again, the class consolidations also look at equity. And we even look at salary surveys to determine pay equity. And, of course, the bargaining process, I would say, supports all of that as well.
Okay. Now, I know that there are, especially through my hearings as a budget sub-chair, there are some positions that are very hard to staff. Are you creating a pipeline for these hard-to-staff positions?
We are always looking at pipelines to establish a good pathway for individuals. Let me see what else I can tell you about that. We are trying to look at apprenticeships. We have, for example, non-traditional apprenticeships, which are also very helpful, but that is for current state employees where they can get into either accounting or cybersecurity. We're always part of CalHR's role is to do statewide recruitment. And that's where my team goes out and we try to teach people how to get a state job, how to apply, what exams are they available for. So we really try to create a pipeline looking at either colleges or high school and try to bring folks in. I personally think this is what CalHR does is we structure our class plan to ensure that there is a pipeline. So when somebody comes in, they at least have a stepped approach to be able to promote in our state workforce. I hope that answers your question.
It does. Before now Senator Lola Smallwood Cuevas joined us, she did a program to UCLA Labor Center. She worked with a number of individuals trained 100 on the ins and outs of applying for a state job After they went through the whole process only 10 were deemed eligible to apply for a state job and only two ended up securing a job. And I've heard from others who applied for a state job about how difficult it is. It isn't just the resume. It's what are the duties and then trying to put those in. But if we have such a, if we're lacking so many employees, what are we doing to ensure that applicants with the appropriate skills can be guided into the right departments?
I agree with you. I've been hearing this for a long time as well. And it's been a long time since I had to apply through the Cal Careers portal. And when I went in there to look, I was like, oh, I can see how this could be a little difficult for an individual who doesn't know how to take the steps. There's quite a few things we've been doing and are going to do. First off, we've improved our website. We created a centralized Work for California site now where there's updated videos. We had such old videos out there, and last year and the year prior, we've been able to update those. it's a centralized website that allows individuals to apply in a much easier fashion, meaning better tools, videos, just tools, tips, and tricks to help them apply and get through the process, right?
How many times have I heard my family member has to help me apply because I can't figure this out? These are smart people usually.
I know, and it continues to happen. But again, as we continue to do class consolidations and simplifying minimum qualifications and allowing different patterns of entry, I think that will help.
But the biggest problem I see is just how does somebody translate their current skills into a state classification?
I'm very excited, actually, to let you know that we are going into a proof-of-concept pilot where we're going to bolt on a skills matching tool onto our website. If somebody uploads a resume or the state application, for example, it will give them a nice option of, for example, if you apply for this classification, you have a 50% chance of meeting the minimum qualifications or 85 or 95. I think that will help folks also be able to apply. I'm looking very forward to implementing that tool to help them along. And then the other thing I wanted to share with you is CalHR is also, right now we are offering, I think it's every second and third Tuesday of the month, where we are going to have help people actually, how do you establish a CalCareers account?
Why do I need it? How do I get in there?
That's happening. And in April, we are going to staff our career counseling center where we can kind of help people apply and get through that process so they can figure out what their skills and match to their classification.
Just as a follow-up, so if somebody applied for a job and rather than just a resume and the jobs they've had, they had to go through all of this process, is somebody reviewing that? Would somebody be calling them? I've talked to people who immediately when I became an assembly member I said you need to apply for a state job. These are the best jobs. No one and I mean no one has received a call back and that for me is disheartening. It is. It is disheartening. Another thing is that with such a large vacancy rate in many departments, why would you remove a recruitment retention tool from your toolbox?
So first let me address the callback piece. We continue to coach departments to reach back out to individuals. But if they don't apply for a department, because the way you've got it set up, you just put all your skills in and somebody's going to review this and determine where you're going to go.
Are you talking about the skills assessment tool I mentioned?
Yes.
Okay.
So the skills assessment tool just tells them you can apply for X job, right? so then they can go into CalCareers and be able to say, okay, pull up all of the vacancies for this job, and then they can go ahead and apply to the individual departments.
I can tell you that of the people that I have recruited, these are college graduates, many of them. They've gone on to other jobs, but not a single one was ever called back, and that concerns me that there's no follow-through. Usually you apply for a job and, you know, you're told, sorry, there's no opening for you or wanted to try something else.
The state of California is so large.
Yes. And I know this is a bigger issue, and I'll be calling you at some other time so we can maybe have you come over to our district and, you know, do some sort of a workshop or seminar so that people know how to apply for the state jobs.
These are great jobs.
They are.
And to be able to have a job would be very important.
Yes. With that, I will yield.
I am so sorry, Amanda.
That's all right. And I'm sorry, I really, it saddens me to hear this. It really does, because we are losing great skilled workers that can come to the state of California. So I'd love to meet with you to discuss this a little bit more.
Wonderful. I look forward to that.
Thank you.
Thank you, Senator Reyes. Senator Jones?
Thank you. Kind of along those same lines, and then also Senator Laird when he was talking about recruitment and retention. There's a movement now amongst private employers and I understand 15 states are taking action in reviewing their hiring requirements and in a lot of cases dropping the requirement for a college degree. My dad didn't have a degree. My mom did have a degree. I barely graduated from San Diego State actually with a human resource management degree that I've never used. the human resource part of it. I think I can honestly say that my degree has opened up some doors, but most of the doors that have opened up for me, I did the work or had the contacts to open those doors, and the degree didn't make a difference. And I noticed, and I'm very impressed in your resume, you don't have a degree.
Correct.
which I will say I am very impressed that you've been able to accomplish what you've accomplished and that you've not let that hold you back.
Yes.
I will say kind of on a personal note, the reason I say that is because on a personal note, I think sometimes my dad used that as an excuse to not do things that he could have done, although he was very successful in many of the things that he did. So where are we at? Where's California with that? And, you know, are we moving in that direction to drop the college degree requirement in a lot of these jobs?
I would certainly support that.
And, you know, my wife doesn't have a degree. She's a very successful business owner. She started her own business and helps her stepdad run his business. So in a lot of cases the degree just isn necessary So where are we at on that Absolutely That main priority for us We added patterns to our classifications for 176 classifications already
and we're going to continue to look at that. We updated our policy about two years ago where we wanted to make sure when departments are looking at their job analysis and the requirements, make certain that there's a need to have a college degree for those types of classifications. So absolutely, we're moving in that direction. We continue to move in that direction. Class consolidations help us with that as well. Now, mind you, we're not removing them, but we are adding patterns that allow for individuals who don't have an education to get into the state. And I will just say –
I would, if you don't mind, just a correction.
Yes.
I mean this as I wouldn't say education. I'd say degree. Yes, of course.
Because people that don't have degrees also have some kind of education.
Yes.
Agreed.
Thank you.
But I will say in my experience, I had an incredible mother who always said, don't let anybody tell you no.
Good. So she lives with me day in and day out in my heart. But, you know, it's hard work. And I've always been very dedicated to whatever job I had. Thankfully, I had incredible mentors throughout my career that I was willing to learn and absorb and take their feedback. Feedback sometimes wasn't great, but I turned that around and made it into something positive. And with that support, this is why I'm here today. And, of course, a lot of people behind me here today. I think I love that, and I think that's a fantastic thing. and that you are probably the right person at the right time to be at the helm of this because of that. The governor, kind of to dig in just a little bit deeper on this, the governor's had an executive order regarding military veterans specifically. Some of our colleagues in the legislature have passed bills dealing with military experience in military education being applicable in some of these cases. And I appreciate your answer. You were quoted in 2024 in a CalMatters article. We're not going to do it overnight, and that changing job descriptions is very complex. I think that you're working to move it in the right direction. You know, my position would be in that. I don't want to speak for all of my colleagues up here, but I think there's some agreement that we need to move as fast as possible on reclassification of these requirements, especially when it comes to our military veterans that are returning from service. And I think the one bill was E6 or higher.
Yes.
We can debate what the proper level is or whatever, but how can we move faster? and what do you need from us as legislators in change of statute or pressure or what can we do to help move faster on this issue and get more people like you that are qualified to do the job into California service?
I appreciate that. Thank you so much. I'm going to say money and positions. No, I'm just kidding. Really, I think we need to look – I am looking into this because we do have what I would say a backlog of what they're called board items, where departments will identify a classification that needs to change to help them hire, and it been sitting with us for some time CalHR is only about 450 positions We don have a lot of people and the division that handles this gets very overwhelmed by a lot of the bargaining and timing of all of this We are working closely with my GovOps agency to try to figure out what the root cause problem is and moving forward to see if we can do a pilot. We are doing a pilot to figure out if there are any steps that we can incorporate to make things move a little faster. I am looking within my organization to see if I'm reorging to try to figure out maybe we can have a division that strictly focuses on these board items instead of having them do a hundred other things. Please keep in mind, we're serving 150 state departments, right? And they get yanked in all different ways. And unfortunately, board items kind of get set on the back burner because there are other fires that CalHR has to contend with. So this is why I'm looking into the organization and seeing if this board unit structure will be more beneficial in how we operate.
Okay. Well, I want to encourage you to not be bashful with the legislature. Thank you. And to, you know, if you and your team see a statutory reform that needs to be made, that you please let us know and that we can start working on those for you.
Thank you very much. And I am working very closely with SPB, by the way, to help us move these items forward.
Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you
Well I appreciate you answering some of these questions I also appreciate that you are clearly fearless And by the look of your water bottle I have just confirmed that Thank you man Your horror is my favorite There you go I wanted to ask you a little bit about What your expectation is In terms of how at least one executive order is kind of ruling out, and that is the return to work. That is supposed to go into effect for four days on July 1st, and I'm just curious if you can speak to what you think your role is and how you are, you know, shifting and
what is happening in terms of your role in that particular order. Well, the executive order has been in effect, and we agreed to a one-year suspension. It will go into effect July 1. I will just tell you my role, obviously, is to represent the governor as the employer in employee-employer relations. The governor gave us parameters we are implementing. We are currently in discussions with unions right now to negotiate the impact of that. What I will say is we are here to help navigate the return to office and provide direction and guidance to the departments to the best that we can. CalHR's role is going to be providing engagement training for folks, reminding the state staff about the benefits that they have available to them to ease the cost of travel. And I'll just throw this out there as a reminder. These benefits include transit reimbursement, dependent care reimbursement. For example, they get $240 a year for the bicycle commute program. Mass transit and van pool subsidies of about $325. childcare resources. But I also want to also say that I do want to thank our state employees for the unprecedented shift to working from home that they had to do during the pandemic and continuing those services and also express my gratitude to those who are not able to work from home and risk their lives to provide the services. I do understand that for many of us, the shift and where we work is going to bring about significant changes and that the idea of returning to or prioritizing in work might be met with reservation And I want to acknowledge those feelings with respect for the diverse experiences and preferences that we all have. CalHR is currently estimating about 106 full-time employees will be impacted by this. and right 106, yes. And right now I do want to let everyone know that governor's appointees are working four days in the office at this time. We're just going to continue to have these conversations and be as helpful as we possibly can to support everyone.
Thank you. The next question I wanted to ask you about is something that I've done some work in, which is just narrowing the gender wage gap. And so I'm wondering if you can speak, you know, the numbers still show that there is a significant wage gap for state employment.
And so insignificant, of course, is in the IODB holder. So I'll say that. If you can just talk to me about what you're doing to try to narrow that gap. Thank you. And then if you do not mind, I'd like to kind of hold this at a little bit of a higher level because pay equity principles is CalHR's obligation to uphold them.
Right.
That is the foundation of the civil service and the classification pay plan for California. What I will say is CalHR administers the class plan, and we're responsible for the proper allocation of every position within state service to the most appropriate classification. I do want to highlight that CalHR does do compensation studies. We have quite a few reports that we publish. Obviously, one of them is the woman's earnings report, And I'm happy to report that over the past 10 years, the pay gap has gone down. The gender pay gap has gone down. We were at 21.1% in 2013, and now we're down to 12.2%. It has trended downward, and the primary reason for that is we have a greater representation of women in higher-paying jobs. this shift among other things has kind of brought that medium base pay for women and men closer and helped reduce gender pay gap over the past 10 years and I will just give you some stats here that I think you would be very interested in hearing about women are better represented in California civil service jobs than in the California and U.S. labor market a larger share of women were employed in bargaining units with higher paying jobs in 2023 compared to 2013. Women in career executive assignment positions has increased from 2013 to 2023. Women account for 56 percent of all career executive assignments in 2023. And I have found that women are well represented in executive level positions now. I do want to say that there are some initiatives that we have that are trying to close this gender pay gap. For example, CalHR has launched a tool. It's called Anonymous Hiring, and it's optional for departments to use it. We have changed the hiring above minimum policy. In the past, we allowed that to be delegated to departments. We found that that may create a little bit of pay inequity, so we've removed that, and now CalHR manages that. Again, I'll highlight nontraditional apprenticeships. If we have women in these classifications, we want to try to get them into IT. That is also another option. And, again, we have Upwork Mobility. And let's see. What I also want to add. Again, I think our policy to add more scrutiny on the standards for including education components and minimum qualifications is also something that can help. And then departments like CHP and CDCR, where you don't have a lot of women, have really expanded their recruitment efforts. So those are some of the things I think that are helping close that gender pay gap.
Great. Thank you. I appreciate that. and look forward to seeing more in this space to get it down from 23% to 12% to less than 12%. Thank you. Thank you. All right, so with that, we're going to open it up to members of the public. If there's any members of the public that would like to speak in support of the nominee,
please come forward. I support my needs 100%.
Thank you. Thank you. I love that.
Crystal Moreno on behalf of the California Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers in support.
Thank you.
Madam Pro Tem, members Ted Toppin for the state engineers, PECG in support. And if you can indulge me for a minute, Senator Laird asked about telework and productivity. And the most definitive response to that is in the state auditor's August 2025 report, where the administration's own departments self-reported in almost every circumstance telework had provided equal or improved levels of services to taxpayers. Thank you.
Thank you. We get a copy.
Madam Chair and Senators, Suzanne Ambrose. I the executive officer at the State Personnel Board and I can personally attest to the fact that I worked very closely with Director Erickson while she been Chief Deputy at Cal HR She very collaborative and very cooperative, very innovative, and on behalf of the five-member board and myself, we are thrilled with the governor's appointment. Great, thank you. If there is anybody in this room
who wishes to speak in opposition of the nominee. This is your time to come forward. All right. Seeing none, we're going to bring it back to the dais. Do we have a motion?
As a, I don't have a college degree. I operate as a HR consulting and temporary staffing company in the real world. When I say the real world, and I'm one of 40. Don't let that ever stop you in any way, shape, or form. And I'd be honored to move the nominee to the floor.
Thank you. Thank you. That motion was made by Vice Chair Grove. Can we please call the roll? Limon? Aye. Limon, aye. Grove? Aye. Grove, aye. Jones? Aye. Jones, aye. Jones, aye. Laird? Aye. Laird, aye. Reyes? Aye. Reyes, aye. 5-0. All right. That appointment has been approved. It will move forward to the full Senate for confirmation. Congratulations. Thank you very much. This concludes today's agenda. I want to thank everybody who was here, who spoke, who provided testimony, and appreciate everyone's patience and cooperation. With that, we will adjourn the Rules Committee hearing. Thank you.