Calif. St. Employees'assn. v. St. Personnel Bd.

41 Cal.App.4th 793 (1995) 48 Cal. Rptr.2d 754 CALIFORNIA STATE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION et al., Plaintiffs and Respondents,

v.

STATE PERSONNEL BOARD et al., Defendants and Appellants; TOOLWORKS, INC., Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

Docket No. C019502. Court of Appeals of California, Third District.

December 28, 1995. [794] COUNSEL

Daniel E. Lungren, Attorney General, Charlton G. Holland, Assistant Attorney General, Dennis Eckhart and Mateo Munoz, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendants and Appellants.

Furth, Fahrner & Mason and Bruce J. Wecker for Real Party in Interest and Appellant.

Harry J. Gibbons and Gary P. Reynolds for Plaintiffs and Respondents.

OPINION

MORRISON, J.

We have previously construed "pay rates," as that term is used in the Government Code, to mean "wages." (California State Employees' Assn. v. State Personnel Bd. (1986) 178 Cal. App.3d 372, 377, 381-382 [223 Cal. Rptr. 826].) In this case the trial court followed that definition and overturned a decision by the State Personnel Board (Board) which departed from that definition. We shall affirm.

The California State Employees' Association obtained a writ commanding the Board to reconsider its decision to permit the use of contract janitors at a particular state facility.

[795] The operative facts are not in dispute. A state agency entered into a contract with real party in interest Toolworks, Inc. (Toolworks), a nonprofit corporation "operating rehabilitation facilities for persons with disabilities. One of [its] goals is to place persons with disabilities into competitive employment." "Although the employees ... would work at reduced salaries, the employees would also work at speeds 50% slower than State janitors."