REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS – Decertification or Disestablishment of Labor Organization

Single Topic for Decision 2904E

View all topics for Decision 2904E

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

Disestablishment is the appropriate remedy if a school district dominated a nonexclusive representative, whereas a cease-and-desist order is sufficient if the school district provided the nonexclusive representative with unlawful support or interfered with its formation or administration. (Redwoods Community College District (1987) PERB Decision No. 650, adopting proposed decision at p. 62 (Redwoods); cf. Ventura Community College District (1994) PERB Decision No. 1073, adopting proposed decision at pp. 31-32 [cease and desist order appropriate where employer provided unlawful support, but domination not proven].) Disestablishment is a customary remedy for domination in the public sector, but it is very uncommon, because it is almost unheard of for a California public entity to engage in such conduct. Cases involving employer domination arise more commonly in the private sector, and disestablishment remains the NLRB’s customary remedy for such a violation. (See, e.g., T-Mobile USA, Inc. (2022) 372 NLRB No. 4, at p. 9, enfd. T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. NLRB (D.C. Cir. 2024) 90 F.4th 564 [affirming NLRB decision ordering disestablishment].) A disestablishment order is proper when a cease-and-desist order would be insufficient to overcome years (or decades) of advantages given to an employer-dominated organization. The NLRB and PERB long ago concluded that disestablishment is the only means to effectively remedy domination. (See, e.g., Jack Smith Beverages, Inc. (6th Cir. 1953) 94 NLRB 1401, 1404 (1951), enfd. 202 F.2d 100, 101 [“The [NLRB] continues to be of the opinion that the only effective remedy for a situation in which an employer is found to have unlawfully dominated a labor organization is to order the employer to disestablish the union.”]; Redwoods, supra, PERB Decision No. 650, adopting proposed decision at p. 62.) (pp. 55-59.)