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

Single Topic for Decision 2861M

View all topics for Decision 2861M

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

An exclusive representative is presumptively entitled to information that is necessary and relevant in discharging its representational duties or exercising its right to represent bargaining unit employees regarding terms and conditions of employment within the scope of representation. In this context, the terms “necessary” and “relevant” do not have separate meanings. PERB uses a liberal, discovery-type standard, like that used by the courts, to determine relevance. A party responding to an information request must exercise the same diligence and thoroughness as it would in other business affairs of importance. An unreasonable delay in providing information constitutes as much of a violation as an outright refusal. Here, there is no question that IBEW requested information relevant to representing unit employees regarding terms and conditions of employment within the scope of representation. The April 13 RFI requested, among other things, information relating to protective measures the District would take to ensure the integrity of sequestration, the number of positions and employees that would be sequestering at each site, and lodging and food arrangements for sequestered employees. As issues concerning health and safety, they are within the scope of representation and therefore presumptively relevant. The same is true of IBEW’s April 16 RFI, which requested information relating to a potential involuntary sequestration scenario, and specifically, how the District would handle such circumstances, as well as how it would treat an employee who refused to sequester. As the ALJ pointed out, discipline is within the scope of representation “both as to the criteria for discipline and as to the procedures to be followed.” (County of Monterey (2018) PERB Decision No. 2579-M, pp. 11-12.) (pp. 46-47.)