CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT – Request for Deferral to Arbitration

Single Topic for Decision 2926S

View all topics for Decision 2926S

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

Dills Act section 3514(a)(2) sets forth a futility exception, while other exceptions flow from the fact that deferral is a discretionary doctrine. For instance, even if all deferral elements are satisfied, PERB will not defer claims alleging interference with or retaliation for filing a PERB charge or participating in PERB processes. (Trustees of the California State University (East Bay) (2014) PERB Decision No. 2391-H, p. 39.) (p. 9, fn. 5.) Moreover, deferral is normally improper if individual employees wish to arbitrate but their union controls that decision and declines to arbitrate. (State of California (Department of Parks and Recreation) (1995) PERB Decision No. 1125-S, pp. 8-9.) Accordingly, State of California (Office of Emergency Services) (1995) PERB Decision No. 1122-S, where the Board deferred to arbitration even though the charging party’s exclusive representative would not arbitrate his claims, is no longer good law on this point. (p. 17, n. 16.)