EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2905M

View all topics for Decision 2905M

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

In assessing whether an employer has dominated an employee organization or interfered with its formation or administration, PERB looks to whether the employer’s conduct tends to interfere with the organization’s ability to maintain an arm’s length relationship with the employer. (Clovis Unified School District (2021) PERB Decision No. IR-63, p. 18.) In such cases, PERB considers the level of the employer’s involvement in the organization’s internal affairs. (Id. at p. 19.) To establish a claim of unlawful domination, a charging party need not show the employer’s conduct actually impacted employee free choice, nor that the employer intended to dominate an organization, interfere with its internal affairs, or infringe on an organization’s ability to maintain an arm’s length relationship with the employer. (Id. at p. 18; City of Arcadia (2010) PERB Decision No. 2648-M, pp. 24-25; West Contra Costa County Healthcare District (2011) PERB Decision No. 2164-M, p. 6.) Because OE3 did not establish agency, its claim that the District, acting through an employee, interfered with OE3’s ability to maintain an arm’s length relationship with the District, failed. (pp. 26-27.)