EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION – Confidentiality; Privacy

Single Topic for Decision 2891M


View all topics for Decision 2891M

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

604.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION
604.04000 – Confidentiality; Privacy

If an information request implicates privacy issues, and the employer offered to bargain and it bargained in good faith to the extent requested, then the union may pursue an unfair practice charge. The focus of the charge becomes the substantive merits of the RFI and the privacy claim. Where the employer raised a significant privacy interest—meaning a legally protected interest that the RFI invades in a manner that is serious in both its nature and its scope—then a balancing test applies. (County of Tulare (2020) PERB Decision No. 2697-M, p. 13; Los Angeles Unified School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2438, pp. 13-14, citing County of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Com. (2013) 56 Cal.4th 905, 926.) Under this test, an employer has the burden to demonstrate that the privacy interest outweighs the union’s informational need. (City and County of San Francisco (2020) PERB Decision No. 2698-M, p. 7; Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652, pp. 17-18; Sacramento City Unified School District (2018) PERB Decision No. 2597, pp. 11-12 & 14, fn. 8; Los Angeles Unified School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2438, pp. 7-8.) (pp. 9-10.)