CA · rules
Cal. Rules of Court, rule 10.761
Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committees
(a) Creation
Government Code sections 71807-71809 establish four Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committees. Each committee has the authority, for spoken language court interpreters within its region as defined under Government Code section 71807(a), to:
(1) Set the terms and conditions of employment for court interpreters, subject to meet and confer in good faith, as authorized by Government Code section 71808;
(2) Adopt reasonable rules and regulations for the administration of employer-employee relations with recognized employee organizations, as authorized by Government Code section 71823(a); and
(3) Act as the representative of the superior courts within the region in bargaining with a recognized employee organization as authorized by Government Code section 71809.
(b) Membership
(1) Each Regional Court Interpreter Employment Committee consists of one representative from each superior court that has at least one interpreter employed as a court interpreter as defined by Government Code section 71806 and not excluded by section 71828(d).
(2) The following regions are established by Government Code section 71807:
(A) Region 1: Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties.
(B) Region 2: Counties of the First and Sixth Appellate Districts, except Solano County.
(C) Region 3: Counties of the Third and Fifth Appellate Districts.
(D) Region 4: Counties of the Fourth Appellate District.
(3) The court executive officer of each superior court may appoint the court's representative, under rule 10.610, which authorizes the court executive officer, acting under the direction of the presiding judge, to oversee the management and administration of the nonjudicial operations of the court.
(4) Each Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee may appoint a chief negotiator to bargain with recognized employee organizations. The chief negotiator may be Judicial Council staff.
(5) Any superior court that is not entitled to appoint a representative under this rule, including the superior courts of Ventura and Solano Counties, may appoint an advisory member to the committee for its region.
(c) Rules of procedure
Each Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee may adopt its own rules of procedure, including the procedure for selecting its chair, advisory members, and chief negotiator.
(d) Voting
(1) Each representative of a superior court has a number of votes equal to the number of court interpreter employees in that trial court as defined by Government Code section 71806 and not excluded by section 71828(d).
(2) On July 1, 2004, and annually thereafter each Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee must recalculate the number of votes of each representative of a superior court to equal the number of court interpreter employees in that court.
(e) Judicial Council staff
Judicial Council staff will assist each Regional Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee in performing its functions.
History
(Subd (b) amended effective January 1, 2016; previously amended effective January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2007.) (Subd (d) amended effective January 1, 2006.) (Subd (e) amended effective January 1, 2016.) Rule 10.761 amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as rule 6.661 effective March 1, 2003; previously amended effective January 1, 2006; previously amended and renumbered as rule 10.761 effective January 1, 2007.
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
21d0c17d4f6c8d37f87a249d6ee8b9e50553b8aea9bd5d47e58b46e0d18e2be9
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.