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

Single Topic for Decision 3034H

View all topics for Decision 3034H

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

There are important differences between PERB’s balancing test and that which applies under FOIA Exemption 6. FOIA Exemption 6 balances the public interest in disclosure—principally public understanding of the operations or activities of the government—against the potential harm an individual would face based on disclosure of private information. (U.S. Dept. of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (1994) 510 U.S. 487, 495.) Under the balancing test that PERB applies in cases not involving the Privacy Act, PERB weighs the union’s particularized need for the information against the privacy interests at stake, and orders disclosure unless the privacy interests outweigh the union’s needs. (City and County of San Francisco (2024) PERB Decision No. 2891-M, p. 10 (San Francisco); County of Tulare (2020) PERB Decision No. 2697-M, p. 13; Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652, p. 18.) Other differences include, for instance, PERB can order a charging party union to keep records or information confidential (San Francisco, supra, PERB Decision No. 2891-M, p. 21), and a California public entity providing a union with information need not provide it to the public (id. at p. 15, fn. 9, citing Boardman v. Inslee (9th Cir. 2020) 978 F.3d 1092, 1110-1113 [collective bargaining disclosures are distinct from public records disclosures and do not trigger public access rights]). (pp. 26-27, fn. 9.)