EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES – Management-Rights Clause; Management Prerogative

Single Topic for Decision 2799M

View all topics for Decision 2799M

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

Applying the test articulated in International Assn. of Fire Fighters, Local 188, AFL-CIO v. Public Employment Relations Bd. (2011) 51 Cal.4th 259, 272-273 (Richmond Firefighters), PERB determined that the definition of surveillance technology falls within the third category of decisions in the Richmond Firefighters framework because it does not primarily concern the employment relationship but does impact that relationship—especially since County employees are by far the main persons who are at risk of violating the Ordinance. PERB found that the balancing test for decisions in this third category weighs in favor of the County’s need for unencumbered decision-making. (County of Orange (2018) PERB Decision No. 2594-M, p. 18, quoting Richmond Firefighters, supra, 51 Cal.4th at p. 273.) PERB reached this conclusion, in part, because the surveillance technology definition is premised on two important government aims—protecting individual privacy and promoting public safety— which have little to do with employment. PERB found comparatively little benefit to requiring decision bargaining over the surveillance technology definition.