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

While employees have the right to express their individual preferences and thereby collectively decide which union (if any) they want to represent their unit through petitions for recognition, certification, decertification, and/or severance, they do not normally have the “right to choose the bargaining unit in which their classification or position is placed.” (Regents v. PERB (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 159, 190; Regents of the University of California (2010) PERB Decision No. 2107-H, pp. 23-24.) Thus, in accretion cases where the unrepresented employees total less than 10 percent of the unit to which they would be added, a petitioner normally need not demonstrate that it has the employees’ support. (Regents v. PERB, supra, 51 Cal.App.5th 159, at pp. 190-192.) In such cases, California public sector labor laws favor stable and harmonious labor relations over affording employees a right to choose their unit placement. (Id. at p. 192.) However, a partially countervailing legal principle nonetheless applies in limited circumstances: if a substantial number of employees in a group have decided to join the same employee organization, such mass membership constitutes a relevant community of interest factor under HEERA section 3579(a)(1) and comparable parts of selected other labor relations acts. (Govt. Code, §§ 3545(a), 99565(a)(1); St. HOPE Public Schools (2018) PERB Order No. Ad-472-H, p. 9.) (p. 34.)