IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2751M

View all topics for Decision 2751M

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

The City’s allegedly diligent attempts to meet and confer in good faith before declaring impasse do not comport with the record. Formal bargaining opened on April 12, 2017, at which point the Association presented its first proposal to the City. The City effectively idled for the next three months, finally announcing on July 31, 2017 that it was available to begin negotiations on August 16 or 17, 2017. In total, 139 days passed before the parties held their second bargaining session on August 29, 2017,
when the City presented its first proposal to the Association. The City’s timeline accelerated thereafter. The City did not wait for a third bargaining session or even for the Association’s response to its first proposal before issuing its LBFO on October 10, 2017. The City’s expressions of good faith ring hollow. Foremost, the City’s claimed “repeated attempts” to meet and confer with the Association were limited to the six-week period subsequent to the parties’ first formal bargaining session on August 29, 2017, with no accounting for the preceding 139 day period, during which the City appears to have sat on the Association’s proposal. Moreover, the City’s claimed attempts to meet and confer with the Association in the 42 days between August 29 and October 10, when it issued its LBFO, consists merely of a September 6, 2017 request for an additional bargaining date. Examined in their totality, these facts do not absolve the City of the finding that it rushed to impasse. We conclude, with the ALJ, that the City’s actions did not evince a genuine desire to reach an agreement, but rather a singular focus on achieving the City’s primary end—the elimination of the Flexible Benefit Plan by a date certain—at any expense to the bargaining process. (pp. 24-26.)