EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION) – Change In Policy

Single Topic for Decision 2876M


View all topics for Decision 2876M

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

602.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION)
602.03000 – Change In Policy

A charging party can establish that new job duties materially deviated from the status quo by showing that new duties or assignments are not “reasonably comprehended” within employees’ prior duties or assignments. (State of California (California Correctional Health Care Services) (2022) PERB Decision No. 2823-S, p. 10 (CCHCS); County of Santa Clara (2022) PERB Decision No. 2820-M, p. 7; Cerritos Community College District (2022) PERB Decision No. 2819, pp. 30-31.) “Reasonably comprehended” is an objective standard that refers to what a reasonable employee would comprehend based on all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, past practice, training, and job descriptions. (CCHCS, supra, p. 10; County of Santa Clara, supra, PERB Decision No. 2820-M, p. 6, citing Rio Hondo Community College District (1982) PERB Decision No. 279, pp. 17-18 [while catchall language in job description does not overcome evidence of contrary past practice, PERB interprets job descriptions in the context of employees’ overall role].) To apply the “reasonably comprehended” standard, the Board compares past duties or assignments to new duties or assignments, through the eyes of a reasonable employee. (County of Santa Clara, supra, PERB Decision No. 2820-M, p. 8.) (p. 22.)