March 24, 2010



Dear Unit 2 Member:


Earlier this morning, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch heard arguments regarding whether the automatic stay of his order to end furloughs at special fund agencies should be lifted.  Following argument from all parties, Judge Roesch ruled from the bench that, effective immediately, furloughs of employees at the following 60 agencies must end without delay:


Air Resources Board • Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board • Attorney General • Business, Transportation, and Housing Agency • California Department of Food and Agriculture • California Department of Transportation • California Earthquake Authority • California Highway Patrol • California Horse Racing Board • California Housing Finance Agency • California Integrated Waste Management Board • California Postsecondary Education Commission • California Prison Industry Authority • California State Coastal Conservancy • California State Lands Commission • California State Lottery Commission • California Tahoe Conservancy • California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board • Commission on Teacher Credentialing • Controller of the State of California • Department of Aging • Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control • Department of Boating and Waterways • Department of Community Services and Development • Department of Conservation • Department of Consumer Affairs • Department of Corporations • Department of Financial Institutions • Department of Fish and Game • Department of General Services • Department of Health Care Services • Department of Housing and Community Development • Department of Industrial Relations • Department of Managed Health Care • Department of Motor Vehicles / New Motor Vehicle Board • Department of Parks and Recreation • Department of Pesticide Regulation • Department of Public Health • Department of Real Estate • Department of Rehabilitation • Department of Social Services • Department of Toxic Substances Control • Department of Veterans Affairs • Department of Water Resources • Division of Workers Compensation • Emergency Medical Services Authority • Employment Development Department • Gambling Control Commission • Insurance Commissioner of the State of California • Managed Risk Medical Insurance Board • Office of Administrative Hearings • Public Employees' Retirement System • Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy • Secretary of State for the State of California • State Council on Developmental Disabilities • State Teachers' Retirement System • State Water Resources Control Board • Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board • Wildlife Conservation Board • Workers' Compensation Appeals Board


As you are likely aware, Judge Roesch’s order included language stating that all salaries unlawfully withheld from CASE members be restored to them.  Unfortunately, at today’s hearing Judge Roesch did not lift the automatic stay as to this part of his order.  Accordingly, the back pay issue will be reviewed by the First District Court of Appeal.  Members who have had their salaries reduced as a result of furloughs will not receive back pay until and unless the Court of Appeal affirms Judge Roesch’s order of February 25, 2010.  CASE will, of course, press this issue in the Court of Appeal.


In related news, last Friday CASE secured the first appellate victory in the furlough litigation with a published decision from the First District Court of Appeal.  The decision affirms Judge Peter Busch’s ruling from last summer in which he invalidated the furloughs for approximately 475 attorneys employed at State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF).  The opinion is available on the CASE website (


An interesting part of the SCIF opinion appears at the bottom third of page 10.  The Court of Appeal refers to the fact that furloughs at an agency like SCIF do not save any money for the general fund.  While this observation is undeniably true, it was not technically essential to the Court’s decision.  Since the appeal of the “special fund” case in Alameda will also be heard in the First District Court of Appeal, the fact that the Court has observed - in a published opinion - that furloughs achieve no savings for special fund departments is a positive development.


Also, earlier this week CASE filed a brief in the California Supreme Court opposing the Governor’s petition to consolidate seven different furlough appeals in that Court.  CASE’s opposition is available on our website (  There is no indication as to when the California Supreme Court might act on the Governor’s petition. 


CASE is committed to protecting the rights of all Unit 2 members, and will continue to fight in the courts, in the Legislature, and at the bargaining table to ensure that California’s legal professionals are treated fairly.  If you have any specific questions, please feel free to direct them to


As always, your support of CASE and your colleagues in Bargaining Unit 2 is greatly appreciated.



The CASE Board of Directors