REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION – Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PERB jurisdictions)

Single Topic for Decision A525H

View all topics for Decision A525H

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

PERB decisions interpreting both HEERA and other PERB-administered statues have repeatedly sought to avoid fragmentation of employee groups and unnecessary proliferation of units. (Regents of the University of California (2017) PERB Order No. Ad-453-H, pp. 23-24.) Thus, unit determinations normally favor larger units even though such units may include a broad array of diverse employees. (County of Monterey (2022) PERB Decision No. 2821-M, p. 11 (Monterey); County of Santa Clara (2019) PERB Decision No. 2670-M, p. 27 (Santa Clara); Regents of the University of California (2010) PERB Decision No. 2107-H, pp. 23-24 & 28-29.) These principles tend to promote employer and union efficiency, while increasing the likelihood that employees have sufficient bargaining strength. Another purpose is ensuring that small and/or newly created classifications retain the realistic possibility of representation. (Santa Clara, supra, PERB Decision No. 2670-M, p. 27.) This is especially true in an accretion or other unit modification context. (Monterey, supra, PERB Decision No. 2821-M, p. 11; Santa Clara, supra, p. 19 [noting that “public sector bargaining units may require modification to avoid fragmentation and ensure operational efficiency”].) (pp. 20-21.)