EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DUTY TO CONSULT – With Nonexclusive Representatives

Single Topic for Decision 0842H

View all topics for Decision 0842H

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

HEERA requires University to notify nonexclusively represented individual employees of proposed changes in employment conditions and, if the employee chooses to have his or her union meet with employer to discuss the changes, such meetings are to be held upon request. Here, University failed to give adequate advance notice that a split payment was necessary and, instead, simply notified the employees that the decision had been made. Whatever information was disseminated was too ambiguous to satisfy University's duty to give notice; p. 13-14; pp. 40-48, proposed dec. Nonexclusively represented employeed affected by employer's decision about split payment of merit salary increase did not have reasonable amount of time between notice and implementation of change to allow them to exercise the representational rights recognized by the court amount of time between notice and implementation of change to allow them to exercise the representational rights recognized by the court What constitues adequate notice should be determined by the specific facts and circumstances of each case. Method of notice must be reasonably calculated to apprise employees of the impending charge; consideration should be given to factors as reliability of past means of giving notice, size of employee group, geographic considerations, and availability of various methods of communication.