All notes for Subtopic 1000.02134 – Staffing Practice
|Decision||Description||PERC Vol.||PERC Index||Date|
Los Angeles Superior Court|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeThe charge failed to state a prima facie case for unlawful unilateral change, where the alleged changes were outside the scope of representation. Union alleged the employer made changes in practice by eliminating nine regular court interpreter assignments and leaving vacancies in daily as-needed assignments unfilled. The Court Interpreter Act specifically provides that the “delivery of court services” is outside the scope of representation, and the Board has held that an employer’s determination of staff or service levels is not within the scope of representation. A matter outside scope does not become a mandatory subject of bargaining because the parties negotiate over it or even reach an agreement. Charge fails to establish a prima facie case where the charge merely states that the employer made staffing decisions based on unlawful animus and not legitimate business reasons. A charging party has the burden to allege the “who, what, when, where and how” of an unfair practice. Mere legal conclusions are not sufficient to state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text.
Trustees of the California State University (California Faculty Association)|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeProposal limiting the number of new temporary employees is within scope. more or view all topics or full text.
Moreno Valley Unified School District|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeStaffing pattern determinations are managerial prerogatives, not subject to negotiations. Such determinations, however, do not include changes of the shifts of individual employees once the initial assignment has been made by the employer. The right to set staffing patterns is not a clear and unmistakable waiver of the right to negotiate shift changes; p. 10, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text.
Norris School District|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeThe level of services that an employer decides to provide is nonnegotiable. This includes the creation of new positions and a determination of the number of hours to be assigned; pp. 10 and 13, proposed dec. The decision to abolish a classification and cease engaging in the activity previously performed by employees in that classification is a managerial prerogative; p. 12, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text.
Redwoods Community College District|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeThe district's adoption of a policy affecting the hiring of part-time, temporary instructors in future semesters was consistent with its established past practice, and represented an exercise of its management prerogative concerning hiring, organization and assignment of work; p. 18. more or view all topics or full text.
Regents of the University of California (Lawrence Livermore)|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeAlthough the University's decision to reduce staffing in the Superblock was outside of the scope of representation, the University had an obligation to meet and negotiate over all reasonably foreseeable effects thereof; pp. 6-7. more or view all topics or full text.
Davis Joint Unified School District|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeProposal to establish fixed ratio per school of reading teachers, librarians, art teachers, psychologists and music teachers is negotiable if designed to set caseload rather than staffing patterns. Proposal was ambiguous but employer failed to exercise obligation to seek clarification; pp. 24-24. more or view all topics or full text.
State of California (Department of Transportation)|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeChanges in staffing practices are within the scope of representation; p. 14. more or view all topics or full text.
Oakland Unified School District|
1000.2134: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Staffing PracticeElimination of positions. Union proposal to lay off one employee in lieu of another is in contravention of employer decision to lay off, and therefore nonnegotiable; p. 32. more or view all topics or full text.