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

Single Topic for Decision 2834E

View all topics for Decision 2834E

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

Once a party receives a request for relevant information, it must either promptly and fully supply the information or timely and adequately explain its reasons for not doing so. (Sacramento City Unified School District (2018) PERB Decision No. 2597, p. 8 (Sacramento).) The responding party bears the burden of proof as to any defense, limitation, or condition that it asserts. (Ibid.) If the responding party believes that a request is unduly burdensome, seeks confidential information, or is otherwise overbroad, the responding party must affirmatively assert its concerns and offer to bargain over those concerns with the requesting party. (Id. at pp. 12-13; State of California (Department of State Hospitals) (2018) PERB Decision No. 2568-S, pp. 15-16 [assertion that an information request is unduly burdensome must be timely raised so the parties can negotiate over eliminating or reducing the responding party’s burden]; Petaluma City Elementary School District/Joint Union High School District (2016) PERB Decision No. 2485, p. 19 (Petaluma) [“Even where a request is arguably ambiguous or overly broad, the employer . . . must seek clarification [or] comply to the extent the request seeks relevant information”].) A responding party must exercise the same diligence and thoroughness as it would in other business affairs of importance, and a charging party need not show that a responding party’s lack of care caused harm. (Sacramento, supra, PERB Decision No. 2597, pp. 8-9; Petaluma, supra, PERB Decision No. 2485, p. 19.) Thus, a responding party violates its bargaining duty if it unreasonably delays its response, even if the delay did not prejudice the requesting party. (Sacramento, supra, PERB Decision No. 2597, p. 9; Petaluma, supra, PERB Decision No. 2485, p. 20.) (pp. 9-10.)