FROM: Barbara Hannah, Chief Counsel
SUBJECT: Alameda Appeal for Clinical Laboratory Scientists (CLS) (fka Professional Laboratory Technicians)
RECOMMENDATION:
title
Approve and adopt the proposed findings and the recommendations of the hearing officer: Alameda Appeal for Clinical Laboratory Scientists (fka Professional Laboratory Technicians).
body
Requested Benefit:
1. Night Standby Pay (D06) is considered Compensation under Government Code section 31460 and Compensation Earnable under Government Code section 31461.
Staff Recommendation:
Pursuant to Government Code Section 31534, upon receiving the final proposed findings and recommended decision of the hearing officer, the board may:
(a) Approve and adopt the proposed findings and the recommendations of the hearing officer, or
(b) Require a transcript or summary of all the testimony, plus all other evidence received by the hearing officer. Upon the receipt thereof the board shall take such action as in its opinion as indicated by such evidence, or
(c) Refer the matter back with or without instructions to the hearing officer for further proceedings, or
(d) Set the matter for hearing before itself. At such hearing, the board shall hear and decide the matter as if it had not been referred to the hearing officer.
BACKGROUND:
On December 5, 2024, the Board remanded this matter to a Formal Hearing under the SBCERA Procedures for Benefit Administrative Appeal Hearings in regard to implementation of exclusion of pay code Night Standby Pay (D06) for employer participant San Bernardino County.
The Board referred the matter back to the original hearing officer, if available, to review additional documentation and oral testimony of the effective members.
On March 3, 2025, the matter was remanded to Daniel B. Haueter, the originally assigned hearing officer in the proceeding providing him with the Board’s instructions to conduct a live, in-person hearing to determine whether Night Standby Pay constituted additional services rendered outside of regular working hours.
On or around March 24, 2025, SBCERA was informed that Daniel Haueter would not be available to oversee the remand of this proceeding due to illness and eventual passing.
On March 24, 2025, the matter was reassigned to Hearing Officer Duane Bennett.
The Formal Hearing was held on September 29, 2025, and the Hearing Officer received all evidence, both testimonial and documentary, and closed the record.
On December 30, 2025, SBCERA received the Hearing Officer’s Proposed Findings and Recommendations, dated December 27, 2025. The Hearing Officer found that the Appellants failed to meet their burden of proof that D06 Pay constitutes compensation earnable. On that same date the proposed Hearing Officer’s findings was served on the parties via e-mail.
On January 8, 2026, SBCERA received the Hearing Officer’s Amended Proposed Findings and Recommendations, dated January 8, 2026, to correct a minor typographical error. On January 9, 2026, the Amended Proposed Findings and Recommendations was served on the parties via e-mail, giving the parties up to and including January 12, 2026, within which to file objections.
On January 9, 2026, Appellants filed Objections to the Hearing Officer’s Findings of Facts and Recommendations, dated January 9, 2026. On January 20, 2026, Respondent SBCERA filed its Reply in Opposition to Appellant’s Objections to the Hearing Officer’s Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation, dated January 20, 2026.
On February 20, 2026, SBCERA received the Hearing Officer’s Final Proposed Findings and Recommendation. On that same date the Hearing Officer’s Final Proposed Findings and Recommendation was served on the parties, and the parties were notified that this matter would be placed on the Board agenda.
Pursuant to Rule 19 of SBCERA’s Procedures for Benefit Administrative Appeal Hearings, the time allotted for the parties to present their position to the Board is as follows:
(1) Each side shall have four (4) minutes of oral argument
(2) The Party requesting oral argument may reserve one (1) minute for rebuttal
(3) Further argument and discussion shall be at the Board Chair’s discretion
Staff is recommending the Board approve and adopt the Hearing Officer’s Final Proposed Findings and the Recommendations.
Appellants are represented by David Vasquez, Esq.
Respondent, SBCERA is represented by Ashley Dunning and Alex Westerfield of Nossaman LLP
STAFF CONTACT:
Barbara Hannah
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A1: Chief Counsel Confidential Memorandum
Exhibit A2: Hearing Officer’s Amended Proposed Findings and Recommendation
Exhibit B: Hearing Officer’s Final Proposed Findings and Recommendation
Exhibit C: Appellants’ Objections to Hearing Officer’s Findings Fact and Recommendations
Exhibit D: Respondent SBCERA’s Reply in Opposition to Appellants’ Objections to the Hearing Officer’s Proposed Findings of Fact and Recommendation
Exhibit E: Appellants Closing Statement
Exhibit F: Respondent SBCERA’s Post-Hearing Statement