EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION) – Duty to Bargain Effects

Single Topic for Decision 2915Ha

View all topics for Decision 2915Ha

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

Decisions with reasonably foreseeable impacts on employee health or safety are a quintessential example of decisions that trigger an obligation to engage in effects bargaining. (International Assn. of Fire Fighters, Local 188, AFL-CIO v. Public Employment Relations Bd. (2011) 51 Cal.4th 259, 276-277; Salinas Valley Memorial Healthcare System (2012) PERB Decision No. 2298-M, p. 19.) Indeed, “where human health and safety are involved,” we should err on the side of finding a change is material enough to trigger bargaining even if it “will affect only a few employees.” (Solano County Employees’ Assn. v. County of Solano (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 256, 262 (Solano).) Notably, Solano held this is true even when management seeks to make the workplace safer, over the union’s objection. (Ibid.) (p. 15.)