To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.
February 19, 1997 - Agricultural Labor Relations Board
April 28, 1995 - Presented To Assembly Budget Subcommittee No.4 on State Administration - Assembly Member Willard Murray, Chair
April 18, 1995 - Presented To: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No.4 on State Administration - Assembly Member Willard Murray, Chair
February 22, 1995 - Analysis of the 1995-96 Budget Bill, Business and Labor Chapter
March 1, 1994 - A major portion of state government expenditures is for compensation of state employees. Expenditures for state employee compensation (excluding higher education employees) will approach $10 billion in 1994-95. In this reprint from the Analysis of the 1994-95 Budget Bill, we discuss the employee compensation issues and options the Legislature should consider in enacting a Budget for 1994-95.
February 22, 1994 - Analysis of the 1994-95 Budget Bill, Business and Labor Chapter
February 8, 1994 - We recommend that the Legislature enact legislation to establish a new, actuarially sound, retirement program for judges taking office in the future in order to reduce long-run state costs for judges' retirement. The legislation should incorporate the retirement plan developed by the Select Committee on Judicial Retirement, with modifications to further reduce state costs, as detailed in this report.
August 20, 1993 - The Legislature is considering legislation that would enhance early retirement incentives, otherwise known as "golden handshakes." In this document, we review concepts, current law, and pending legislation regarding golden handshakes. If the Legislature concludes that additional golden handshake authority is needed, we believe the Legislature should consider the steps outlined below as ways to assure accomplishing its policy goals.
March 1, 1993 - In the November 1992 election, the voters approved Proposition 162—the California Pension Protection Act of 1992. This act may fundamentally alter relationships between retirement boards and the executive and legislative branches of these levels of government. There are many issues related to implementation of this act that will be of concern to the Legislature. Key issues include (1) how the Legislature can carry out oversight of the budget of the Public Employee's Retirement System and the State Teachers' Retirement System if those systems are free to spend funds without appropriations and (2) whether, or to what extent, these and other retirement boards are exempt from a wide range of provisions of state law and the State Constitution.
March 1, 1987 - The Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA) program is one of the primary government programs providing employment and training services in California. In this report, we review selected elements of the operation of the JTPA program.
April 1, 1986 - Chapter 1074, Statutes of 1982 (AS 3461), established the Employment Training Panel (ETP) program to provide training and jobs to individuals who are covered under the Unemployment Insurance system. Chapter 1074 also required the Legislative Analyst to prepare a report on the performance and cost-effectiveness of the ETP program and to recommend "any appropriate improvements." This report was prepared in response to Chapter 1074's directive.
May 1, 1985 - The San Diego Job Search and Work Experience Demonstration program was established in 1982 for the purpose of determining the impact that specific employment services have on applicants for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). The demonstration program was conducted by the San Diego County welfare department in cooperation with the state departments of Employment Development (EDD) and Social Services (DSS), and was evaluated by the Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation (MDRC).
January 1, 1985 - The state Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) is in the process of implementing administratively a federal tax provision allowing the state to "pick up" mandatory employee retirement contributions. Implementation of the pickup program would result in increased take-home pay to state employees—due primarily to reduced federal tax liabilities—at no direct cost to the state. In this report, we examine the fiscal and policy implications of implementing the pickup program.