REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2749E

View all topics for Decision 2749E

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

The Legislature has delegated to PERB broad powers to remedy EERA violations and to take any action the Board deems necessary to effectuate the Act’s purposes. (EERA, § 3541.5, subd. (c); City of San Diego (2015) PERB Decision No. 2464-M, p. 42 (San Diego), affirmed sub nom. Boling v. Public Employment Relations Bd. (2018) 5 Cal.5th 898; Mt. San Antonio Community College Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd. (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 178, 189-190.) A “properly designed remedial order seeks a restoration of the situation as nearly as possible to that which would have obtained but for the unfair labor practice.” (Modesto City Schools (1983) PERB Decision No. 291, pp. 67-68.) An appropriate remedy therefore should make whole all injured persons or organizations for the full amount of their losses and should withhold from the wrongdoer the fruits of its violation. (City of Pasadena (2014) PERB Order No. Ad-406-M, p. 13 (Pasadena).) In addition to serving restorative and compensatory functions, a Board-ordered remedy should also deter future misconduct, so long as the order is not a patent attempt to achieve ends other than those which can fairly be said to effectuate the policies of the Act. (City of Palo Alto (2019) PERB Decision No. 2664-M, p. 3; San Diego, supra, PERB Decision No. 2464-M, pp. 40-42; Pasadena, supra, PERB Order No. Ad-406-M, pp. 12-13.)