All notes for Subtopic 1000.02147 – Transfer of Work Out of Unit

DecisionDescriptionPERC Vol.PERC IndexDate
2694M * * * JUDICIAL APPEAL PENDING * * * City of Glendale
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
City’s decision was only non-bargainable to the extent it temporarily stopped performing certain functions altogether. For those functions still performed, City’s decision was equally bargainable to the extent the City began using not only private contractors but also City employees outside bargaining unit to perform some of the classification’s traditional work. PERB reached its conclusion with respect to the transfer of certain work to City employees outside the bargaining unit based on extensive precedent holding that such a decision is bargainable if either (i) the work was not historically shared with other classifications outside the bargaining unit, or (ii) the employer decision at issue completely removed the work from the bargaining unit, when in the past it had been shared between employees in and out of the bargaining unit. (See, e.g., Desert Sands Unified School District (2010) PERB Decision No. 2092, p. 20; Calistoga Joint Unified School District (1989) PERB Decision No. 744, p. 9.) PERB found the transfer of work to City employees outside of the bargaining unit qualified as bargainable under both of these tests, independently. more or view all topics or full text.
02/03/20
2398H Regents of the University of California
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
The UC-AFT failed to meet its burden of proving a unilateral transfer of unit work, since the UC-AFT has not proven that the non-bargaining unit adjuncts are now performing duties that were previously exclusively performed by unit employees. more or view all topics or full text.
396411/17/14
2351M City of Sacramento
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
An employer’s decision to transfer bargaining unit work out of the unit is negotiable as to both the decision itself and its effects, regardless of whether the decision is based on a lack of work or lack of money. more or view all topics or full text.
3810412/24/13
2311M City of Escondido
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
When a transfer of unit work is found to be within the scope of representation, the employer must bargain the decision to transfer work from the bargaining unit, not merely its effects on the employees; where, as a result of the transfer, the employer eliminated work previously performed by bargaining unit employees and re-assigned it to employees outside of the unit, the exception in Eureka City Schools (1985) PERB Decision No. 481, applicable where there has been a change in distribution of overlapping duties between unit and non-unit employees, does not apply; that the employer negotiated the effects of its decision to lay off the employees does not satisfy its duty to negotiate its decision to transfer work. more or view all topics or full text.
03/08/13
2092E Desert Sands Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
In general, transfers of work from employees in one bargaining unit to employees in another are negotiable. Similarly, transfers of work from one classification to another within the same bargaining unit are also negotiable. Notwithstanding the general rule, not all transfers of work are negotiable. Where unit and non-unit employees perform overlapping duties, an employer does not violate its duty to negotiate in good faith merely by increasing the quantity of work which non-unit employees perform and decreasing the quantity of work which unit employees perform. This exception, however, does not apply where, as a result of the transfer, unit employees ceased performing duties that they previously performed, or non-unit employees began performing duties that were previously exclusively performed by unit employees. more or view all topics or full text.
343902/01/10
2070H Trustees of the California State University (San Marcos)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
No prima facie case of unilateral change when charge failed to establish that employer removed bargaining unit work from unit members or that nonunit employees began performing duties previously performed exclusively by unit members. Charge also failed to establish that any reallocation of bargaining unit work had a negotiable effect on unit members’ terms and conditions of employment. more or view all topics or full text.
3317310/15/09
1960M South Placer Fire Protection District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Removing a classification from the bargaining unit is a transfer of unit work that falls within the scope of representation under the MMBA. more or view all topics or full text.
329606/10/08
1839H Trustees of the California State University * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Kern and Kern County Hospital Authority (2019) PERB Decision No. 2659-M
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
There is no duty to bargain where Respondent did not transfer bargaining unit work out of the unit or substitute one group of employees for another. There was no evidence that any unit employees ever performed work at that campus. That some student housing services at other campuses were performed by bargaining unit employees does not of itself mandate that housing services be performed by bargaining at this campus. more or view all topics or full text.
3011805/12/06
1827E Los Angeles Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
When the duties performed by unit and non-unit employees have traditionally overlapped, there is no unlawful transfer to work when the quantity of work performed by non-unit employees increases and the quantity of work performed by unit employees decreases. Sheriff’s deputies have long performed security along side school district police demonstrating overlapping duties. more or view all topics or full text.
308503/08/06
1778E Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
CSEA failed to establish a prima facie case that the District had the obligation to meet and negotiate its decision to transfer duties from the abolished ASB/EDA classification to other classifications. Since CSEA did not identify the classifications to which the duties had been transferred, it cannot be determined whether or not these other classifications were existing or newly created classifications, within or outside of the existing bargaining unit. CSEA presented no evidence to show that the transferred duties were neither overlapping nor even remotely encompassed in the job description of these other classifications. more or view all topics or full text.
2916710/06/05
1682E Desert Sands Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
The Board has long held that a transfer of unit work from one group of employees to another to be within the scope of representation. The installation of covert cameras was identified as an essential job function on the ERT job description, a document negotiated by the parties and approved by the District’s board and personnel commission and thus not a “function not previously performed” and thereby within managerial prerogative. Under Eureka City School District (1985) PERB Decision No. 481 (Eureka), transfers of unit work are negotiable where unit employees cease performing duties that they previously performed or non-unit employees begin to perform duties that were previously exclusively performed by unit employees. As the District has completely removed the covert camera installation function from ERTs, these facts fit within the first prong of Eureka. Transfer of unit work between classifications within the same unit is also negotiable. (Desert Sands Unified School District (2001) PERB Decision No. 1468.) more or view all topics or full text.
2824108/25/04
1685E Allan Hancock Joint Community College District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Charge alleged that district’s use of administrators, instead of part-time faculty, to teach classes constituted an unlawful transfer of work. Based on Eureka, Board dismissed charge where it was undisputed that administrators previously taught classes sporadically and there were no other facts indicating that teaching duties were not overlapping. more or view all topics or full text.
2824909/08/04
1614S State of California (Department of Developmental Services)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Department’s use of CHP unit members instead of CAUSE unit members to provide security at a disciplinary hearing was not a negotiable transfer of work where duties were overlapping and charging party failed to allege any negotiable impact on its members. more or view all topics or full text.
2812604/05/04
1547E Ventura County Community College District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Community college district and local sheriff unilaterally entered into an agreement to allow sheriff’s employees to teach criminal justices for students who would receive college credit. Board found that the agreement was not a subcontracting decision since District maintained the primary right of control over the sheriff’s employees. Instead, Board analyzed the agreement as akin to a transfer of work and found that the decision to utilize sheriff’s employees as instructors was within the scope of representation. more or view all topics or full text.
2713309/24/03
1468E Desert Sands Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Transfer of existing video camera installation duties between classifications is a negotiable subject, both as to the decision and its effects, notwithstanding fact that work remained in the same bargaining unit. more or view all topics or full text.
263301311/28/01
1390S State of California (Department of Corrections)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Department's theory of overlapping duties was insufficient defense to the claim that it had violated the Dills Act. Under new staffing pattern, supervising cooks were virtually eliminated from any meaningful participation in the food service process. A diminution of this magnitude evidences a change in the quantity and kind of the duties of the respective employees and constitutes a unilateral change in an established policy. Supervising cooks were involved in supervision training and assignment of food preparation work. The quantity of supervision work was decreased and is not negotiable under Eureka. However, correctional officers began to perform training in food preparation, and began assignment of food preparation work, despite the fact that supervising cooks had done this work exclusively in the past. The transfer of work in these two areas constituted violations under Eureka. The Board has yet to deal with a situation where there is a severe redistribution of overlapping duties from unit to nonunit employees. In light of its finding here that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, it was again unnecessary for the Board to address the question of severe redistribution. more or view all topics or full text.
243111106/26/00
1391S State of California (Department of Corrections)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Department's theory of overlapping duties was insufficient defense to the claim that it had violated the Dills Act. Under new staffing pattern, supervising cooks were virtually eliminated from any meaningful participation in the food service process. A diminution of this magnitude evidences a change in the quantity and kind of the duties of the respective employees and constitutes a unilateral change in an established policy. Supervising cooks were involved in supervision training and assignment of food preparation work. The quantity of supervision work was decreased and is not negotiable under Eureka. However, correctional officers began to perform training in food preparation, and began assignment of food preparation work, despite the fact that supervising cooks had done this work exclusively in the past. The transfer of work in these two areas constituted violations under Eureka. The Board has yet to deal with a situation where there is a severe redistribution of overlapping duties from unit to nonunit employees. In light of its finding here that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, it was again unnecessary for the Board to address the question of severe redistribution. more or view all topics or full text.
243111206/26/00
1392S State of California (Department of Corrections)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Department's theory of overlapping duties was insufficient defense to the claim that it had violated the Dills Act. Under new staffing pattern, supervising cooks were virtually eliminated from any meaningful participation in the food service process. A diminution of this magnitude evidences a change in the quantity and kind of the duties of the respective employees and constitutes a unilateral change in an established policy. Supervising cooks were involved in supervision training and assignment of food preparation work. The quantity of supervision work was decreased and is not negotiable under Eureka. However, correctional officers began to perform training in food preparation, and began assignment of food preparation work, despite the fact that supervising cooks had done this work exclusively in the past. The transfer of work in these two areas constituted violations under Eureka. The Board has yet to deal with a situation where there is a severe redistribution of overlapping duties from unit to nonunit employees. In light of its finding here that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, it was again unnecessary for the Board to address the question of severe redistribution. more or view all topics or full text.
243111306/26/00
1320E Ocean View School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
School District's contract with parent-owned company to provide transportation services (with parent volunteers driving) previously performed by District employees properly analyzed as contracting out rather than transfer of bargaining unit work; p. 2, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text.
233008003/22/99
1255H Regents of the University of California (California Nurses Association)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Transfer of primary duties from registered nurses to cardiovascular technicians (CVT) constitutes a negotiable change in a term or condition of employment of bargaining unit employees; p. 35, proposed dec; These facts do not fall under the Eureka test because CVT's had not been previously employed by employer. more or view all topics or full text.
222906603/20/98
1090E Norris School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
The decision to transfer duties from one classification to another is negotiable; p. 14, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text.
192606803/16/95
0884E Modesto City School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Although the practical effect of modifying a unit under PERB Regulation 32781(b)(1) may be to transfer work out of the unit, it is not an unlawful transfer because it is done in accord with the process PERB requires the employer to observe; p. 11. [The Board's decisions in Regents of the University of California (California Nurses Association) (1989) PERB Decision No. 722-H and Mt. San Antonio Community College District (1983) PERB Decision No. 334] indicate the removal of work from a bargaining unit may lawfully occur as a collateral affect of a unit modification when PERB's statutory and regulatory procedures are followed; pp. 12-13. more or view all topics or full text.
152209906/03/91
0868E Whisman Elementary School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Unilateral acts of subcontracting and transfer of work have been analyzed differently by the Board; p. 12. Transfer of work involves a transfer of unit work to nonunit employees of the same employer; p. 12. Where Education Code section 35021 expresses legislative intent to limit those circumstances where a volunteer aide will be found to be an employee of the District, transfer of work to volunteers analyzed under subcontracting analysis; pp. 13-14. more or view all topics or full text.
152204302/14/91
0754E Calexico Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
The mere increase in the amount of overlapping duties to non-unit employees is not unlawful; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text.
132015907/17/89
0744E Calistoga Joint Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Where an employer eliminated all work previously performed by a classified unit and reassigned it to a certificated unit without affording the union a prior opportunity to bargain, an unlawful unilateral transfer of work occurs regardless of whether the duties were overlapping; pp. 8-9. more or view all topics or full text.
132013406/19/89
0718H California State University, San Diego * * * OVERRULED by Long Beach Community College District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1564, and Los Angeles Unified School District (2014) PERB Decision No. 2359
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
No unlawful transfer of work where bargaining unit employees did not cease to perform work which they had previously performed and past practice existed whereby non-bargaining unit employee perfomed bargaining unit work in response to emergency conditions. more or view all topics or full text.
132003701/17/89
0722H Regents of the University of California (California Nurses Association)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
A unilateral reassignment of unit employees to non-unit positions is a transfer of unit work and is improper without meeting and conferring prior to reassignment; p. 10. more or view all topics or full text.
132005903/03/89
0648S State of California (Department of Personnel Administration)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Work-preservation clauses are within scope even when intertwined with a proposal containing a blanket prohibition on the transfer of unit work. Where a transfer of work occurs in a situation that is not an emergency, the union has a vested right in maintaining what it already has. more or view all topics or full text.
132001312/18/87
0636S California Community Colleges
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Charge fails to state prima facie case of transfer of work where no past practice alleged as to assignment of work to units. more or view all topics or full text.
111817310/06/87
0580E Roseville Joint Union High School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
While action by District may be impermissible transferring of work, a full hearing is necessary to determine whether "prisoners" are "employees." more or view all topics or full text.
101713606/30/86
1955H Trustees of the California State University (San Diego)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
The employer did not unlawfully contract out work when its decision to discontinue staffing remedial mathematics and writing classes was made independent of its decision to contract with a third party to teach these classes. more or view all topics or full text.
327404/24/08
0484S State of California (Department of Developmental Services)
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
No transfer of work where, at all relevant times nonunit and unit employees had overlapping duties and no particular duty or function removed from unit; any transfer occurred prior to union's certification. more or view all topics or full text.
91607301/24/85
0481E Eureka City School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
To prove unilateral transfer of work, charging party must prove that unit employees ceased to performed work which they had previously performed or that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, therefore, where duties traditionally overlapped, no unlawful transfer to work merely by increasing quantity performed by nonunit employees and decreasing quantity performed by unit employees. more or view all topics or full text.
91606001/15/85
0465E Lincoln Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Unilateral transfer found where district used volunteer driver's for weekend trips; source of funding is not relevant to determination; pp. 2-3. more or view all topics or full text.
91603612/18/84
0391E Goleta Union School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Transfer found in assignment of counseling duties to consultant counselors who, although held to be employees, are not members of the bargaining unit. The transfer diminished the work of the unit and deprived unit counselors of actual or potential work. more or view all topics or full text.
81513408/01/84
0393E Davis Joint Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
A proposal to limit the employer's right to transfer teacher work to teacher's aides is negotiable as the proposal attempt to preserve unit work and thus relates to wages, hours and enumerated terms and conditions of employment; pp. 25-26. more or view all topics or full text.
81513608/02/84
0375E Healdsburg Union High School District and Healdsburg Union School District/San Mateo City School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Transferring out bargaining unit work to non-unit members is negotiable; p. 43. Transfer of work out of unit is negotiable; p. 43. more or view all topics or full text.
81502101/05/84
0334E Mt. San Antonio Community College District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Reclassification of position is negotiable. Where reorganization plan creates new position to perform duties previously performed by bargaining unit employees, is negotiable. Fact that employee has supervisory responsibilities is relevant for unit determination only. If an employee hasn't been determined to be a supervisor then that employee and his duties are in the bargaining unit and removal is negotiable. more or view all topics or full text.
71422608/18/83
0297E Mt. San Antonio Community College District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Transfer of unit work out of the bargaining unit is a matter fully within the scope of representation; p. 9. more or view all topics or full text.
71410903/24/83
0219E Solano County Community College District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Decision and effects of decision to transfer work from classified to certificated unit is negotiable because it impacts of wages and hours associated with the transferred-out work, diminishes unit work, and weakens collective strength of employees in the unit; pp. 8-9. more or view all topics or full text.
61315406/30/82
0209E Rialto Unified School District
1000.2147: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Transfer of Work Out of Unit
Board applies Anaheim test to determine that the unilateral transfer of work from attendance counselors (certificated) to persons in classified unit violates EERA section 3543.5(c) and, concurrently, 3543.5(a) and (b). Ultimate impact is loss of work to the unit; pp. 2-9. more or view all topics or full text.
61311304/30/82