EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2698M

View all topics for Decision 2698M

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

The Board rejected the employer’s argument that it was absolved of any duty to meet and confer with the union over redactions in an investigation report concerning a bargaining unit employee
because the union never made such a request. Following the union’s original request for information and receipt of a heavily-redacted investigation report, the union next attempted to obtain clarification regarding the redactions. After the employer responded in a conclusory manner, the union made two subsequent requests for a full, unredacted copy of the report. Almost three months later, the employer provided a report with fewer redactions. In all instances the employer solely determined what information to redact, thereby “converting the applicable procedure from a two-way negotiation to a unilateral decision.” [Citation.] Although these follow-up efforts clarified the dispute, they were not a necessary element to proving the employer’s violation; a union has no duty to request to meet and confer if an employer has unilaterally determined what information to redact and presented its decision as a fait accompli rather than as a proposal. (pp. 11-12.)