REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2888S

View all topics for Decision 2888S

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

The Dills Act vests PERB with the authority to determine “what remedy is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.” (§ 3514.5, 1st par.) In a separate subdivision, the Dills Act notes that this authority includes directing “an offending party to cease and desist from the unfair practice and to take such affirmative action, including, but not limited to, the reinstatement of employees with or without back pay, as will effectuate the policies of this chapter.” (§ 3514.5, subd. (c).) Identical language appears in other statutes under PERB’s jurisdiction, and courts have uniformly found it to grant PERB broad remedial power. (See, e.g., Mt. San Antonio Community College Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd. (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 178, 189-190.) An appropriate remedy must fully compensate affected employees for harm caused by an unfair practice and serve as a deterrent to future misconduct, so long as the order is not a patent attempt to achieve ends beyond the law’s purposes. (State of California (Correctional Health Care Services) (2021) PERB Decision No. 2760-S, p. 35.) (p. 35.)