All notes for Subtopic 1205.12000 – Provision of Information
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1704M |
Golden Empire Transit District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The District violated the MMBA by refusing to provide unit employees’ addresses and phone numbers. Local 517 is entitled to all information which is “necessary and relevant” to the discharge of its duty of fair representation. Failure to provide this information is a “per se” violation of the duty to bargain in good faith because it is “fundamental to the expanse of a union’s relationship with the employees.” Local 517 is entitled to the phone numbers and addresses of all unit employees, including the four (of 200) who requested confidentiality. When constitutional privacy rights are implicated, the Board must balance the privacy interests of employees against the union’s need for information. Local 517 needs this information for access to unit members while there is no statutory requirement that prohibits disclosure of the requested information to Local 517. Employer has burden of proof to demonstrate disclosure would compromise confidentiality. more or view all topics or full text. |
29 | 7 | 11/08/04 |
| 2891M |
City and County of San Francisco
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
One appropriate accommodation of competing interests is to restrict a union’s use of information to limited, proper purposes. (Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652, p. 19; Sacramento City Unified School District (2018) PERB Decision No. 2597, pp. 12-13; Los Angeles Unified School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2438, p. 20.) The Board added a protective order to its remedy, thereby adopting a common judicial approach to allowing full discovery while minimizing intrusions on privacy. The Board directed the union to refrain from releasing disaggregated race/ethnicity information and to use such information only as needed to investigate and/or seek to prevent, lessen, ameliorate, or remedy potential workplace discrimination or other potential legal or contractual violations. (pp. 20-21.) more or view all topics or full text. |
48 | 132 | 02/27/24 |
| 2891M |
City and County of San Francisco
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
In determining whether to order employer to provide information, PERB considers union’s promise to keep the information confidential. The Board noted that unions are commonly entrusted with private employee information, as “[o]ne of the consequences of collective bargaining is that it subordinates the particular interests of individual employees to the collective interest of the unit.” (Los Angeles Unified School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2438, p. 11, citation omitted.) (pp. 10-11.) more or view all topics or full text. |
48 | 132 | 02/27/24 |
| 0891H |
Regents of the University of California (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees)
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Providing information in a telephone conversation did not satisfy University's obligation to provide requested information where accuracy of the information provided in the conversation is placed into question by publication of article in campus newspaper which quoted extensively from a University memo; p. 7. While AFSCME might not be entitled to specific copies of internal University memorandum, it was entitled to some definitive source of information other than a mere telephone discussion of the "basic elements" of the memos; pp. 7-8. The fact that various departments were in process of developing individual plans for meeting budget goals does not justify University's failure to provide relevant and readily available information; p. 8. Obligation to provide information is not dependent on when employer makes budgeting decision discussed in memos. more or view all topics or full text. |
15 | 22117 | 07/03/91 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
There is no categorical rule denying a union access to information pertaining to a mandatory subject, even when the parties are not in bargaining and the union intends to use the information to advise or represent an employee in relation to an extra-contractual issue or forum. Because discipline is within the scope of representation, information pertaining to actual or potential discipline is presumptively relevant, even if the only contemplated disciplinary forum is extra-contractual. Information pertaining to actual or potential discipline is presumptively relevant, no matter in what forum the disciplinary matter might be resolved, as union has right to information necessary or relevant to its right to represent bargaining unit employees. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 0864E |
Newark Unified School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Association entitled to staffing and enrollment projections prepared for District to verify need to transfer teacher; p. 18. more or view all topics or full text. |
15 | 22023 | 01/14/91 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
A union has a right to sufficient information regarding alleged wrongdoing to enable a union representative to represent an employee in a meaningful manner during an investigatory interview, but the union does not obtain the right to an underlying written complaint until after the initial investigatory interview. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2597E |
Sacramento City Unified School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Information pertaining to non-bargaining unit employees is not presumed relevant, and the exclusive representative thus bears the burden of demonstrating that such information is relevant and necessary to its representational duties. A union demonstrates relevance where it has requested information that may help it compare the disciplinary circumstances relevant to a bargaining unit employee, including the allegations and any resulting discipline, with prior circumstances involving non-bargaining unit employees. (p. 9, fn. 6.) Union had right to obtain, evaluate, and introduce evidence that arguably may have supported a disparate treatment argument, even where information pertained to a non-bargaining unit employee (p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. |
43 | 77 | 11/19/18 |
| 0799H |
California State University (California Faculty Association)
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
While, in some circumstances, a failure to provide information could interfere with negotiations to the extent that restoration of the status quo would be proper, where the violations are of a minor nature that did not seriously hamper bargaining, and where impasse would have been reached anyway, restoration of the status quo is inappropriate; pp. 5-6. more or view all topics or full text. |
14 | 21072 | 03/28/90 |
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Where union’s RFI requested health and safety information regarding its members’ worksite, a national research lab owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and operated by the University, PERB crafted its remedy with due regard to the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act; 5 U.S.C. § 552a). To the extent the Board ordered the University to provide union with records, the Board ordered such production for the five-year period union sought, and also ordered University to provide updated records promptly upon receiving such a request from the union. (City and County of San Francisco (2024) PERB Decision No. 2891-M, p. 23 (San Francisco).) To the extent the Board ordered redaction, University ordered to use de-identified placeholders that facilitate tracking across multiple records. (Id. at p. 16; County of Tulare (2020) PERB Decision No. 2697-M, p. 14 (Tulare); Sacramento City Unified School District (2018) PERB Decision No. 2597, p. 13, fn. 7.) Because redaction can provide imperfect protection to individual privacy, the Board issued a complementary safeguard and directed union to use the records it receives only to investigate health and safety issues at national research lab and to pursue measures to prevent, lessen, ameliorate, or remedy such issues, including through collective bargaining. (San Francisco, supra, PERB Decision No. 2891-M, p. 21.) Finally, the Board directed PERB’s Office of the General Counsel or a designee to resolve any compliance disputes that arise in a manner consistent with its decision, issuing clear, written orders after in camera review of all necessary records. (Tulare, supra, PERB Decision No. 2697-M, pp. 15-16.) The compliance officer may, but need not, direct the University or union to submit a FOIA request to the extent the compliance officer finds that doing so will assist in expeditiously resolving this matter. (pp. 35-36.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The Privacy Act permits disclosure of records “to a recipient who has provided the agency with advance adequate written assurance that the record will be used, and the solely as a statistical research or reporting record, and the record is to be transferred in a form that is not individually identifiable.” (5 U.S.C.§552a(b)(5).) The Board interprets the Privacy Act’s statistical research exception in line with federal precedent. Such precedent holds that the determinative concern is whether the data is de-identified and how information will be used. Accordingly, the Board found it sufficient to order the University to disclose records in a de-identified manner and to require union to limit its use and disclosure of the de-identified records. (pp. 32-33.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
While the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act; 5 U.S.C. § 552a) applies to University as a federal contractor, union was not required to submit a FOIA request to federal Department of Energy (DOE) rather than an RFI to the University. FOIA establishes a mechanism for the public to access federal records; it does not displace any independent statutory right to information arising under a collective bargaining statute. And the University-DOE contract does not purport to require a union seeking DOE-owned information from the University to file a FOIA request, nor does it otherwise purport to limit the University in complying with HEERA by providing records that fall within a Privacy Act exception. (p. 29.) Nevertheless, in an abundance of caution and to facilitate efficient compliance, PERB recognizes that a FOIA request may in some circumstances be the most rapid means to obtain records. Accordingly, the Board’s remedial order empowered the compliance officer with discretion, as part of ensuring prompt records disclosure in a manner consistent with the Board’s decision, to require that union or University utilize FOIA procedures if helpful in implementing PERB’s order. The Board made explicit that this procedural authority does not reflect any legal requirement that union proceed through FOIA but instead allows flexibility in choosing the best means to achieve prompt compliance. (p. 32.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Where union’s RFI requested health and safety information regarding its members’ worksite, a national research lab operated by the University, PERB crafted its remedy with due regard to the Privacy Act of 1974 (Privacy Act; 5 U.S.C. § 552a). Because it is a federal statute, Supreme Court precedent such as U.S. Dept. of Defense v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (1994) 510 U.S. 487 (DOD v. FLRA) controls PERB’s Privacy Act interpretation. The main consequence is as follows: whereas FOIA exemptions do not independently bar disclosure under HEERA, the Privacy Act can constrain disclosure of certain records, and in evaluating such cases PERB applies the FOIA Exemption 6 standards explained in DOD v. FLRA, supra, 510 U.S. 487. Thus, when a federal agency claims the Privacy Act bars disclosure and a requesting union interposes the FOIA exception, the agency has the initial burden to show: “(1) that the information requested is contained in a ‘system of records’ under the Privacy Act; (2) that disclosure of the information would implicate employee privacy interests; and (3) the nature and significance of those privacy interests.” (U.S. Dep’t of Transp. Fed. Aviation Admin, New York TRACON Westbury (1995) 50 FLRA 338, 345.) If the agency meets this burden, then the union must: “(1) identify a public interest that is cognizable under the FOIA; and (2) demonstrate how disclosure of the requested information will serve that public interest.” (Ibid.) At that point, it is necessary to “balance the privacy interest against the public interest.” (Ibid.) If the public interest in disclosure outweighs the privacy interest, then a record may be disclosed in unredacted form. (See, e.g., National Ass’n of Atomic Veterans, Inc. v. Director, Defense Nuclear Agency (D.D.C. 1984) 583 F. Supp. 1483, 1485-1488 [granting FOIA request by veterans’ group based on public interest in helping veterans exposed to radiation]; Dep't of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Affairs Med. Ctr. Decatur, Georgia (2019) 71 FLRA 428, 445-449 [rejecting argument of Veterans Administration that Privacy Act required documents to be produced only in redacted form].) In contrast, if the public interest in disclosure does not outweigh that privacy interest, FOIA requires the federal agency or contractor to segregate identifying information (typically via redaction) and disclose the remainder of the record. (5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(8)(A)(ii) & (b), final par.; Department of Air Force v. Rose (1976) 425 U.S. 352, 374 & 381-382 [although redaction of identifying information provides individuals with imperfect privacy protection, redaction is a time tested and practical means of implementing FOIA’s clear segregation requirement].) (pp. 27-28.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Legal frameworks external to PERB-administered statutes—most commonly those establishing privacy protections—may impact PERB’s remedy in an RFI case. (City and County of San Francisco (2024) PERB Decision No. 2891-M, pp. 16, 18-19; Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652, pp. 20-26 (Contra Costa).) Even where an employer has violated a collective bargaining statute through delay, waiver of defenses, or other defects in its response to an information request, PERB retains discretion to account for legitimate third-party privacy interests when fashioning a remedy. (County of Tulare (2020) PERB Decision No. 2697-M, p. 15 (Tulare); Contra Costa, supra, PERB Decision No. 2652, p. 20.) This principle does not negate the underlying violation but may limit the scope of the relief ordered. Accordingly, rather than remanding for the parties to bargain, the Board found it appropriate to direct a PERB compliance officer to oversee the disclosure process, ensuring prompt implementation of the Board’s order while accommodating all legitimate competing interests. (Tulare, supra, p. 15.) (p. 15.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 3034H |
Regents of the University of California
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The remedy for failure to provide information normally includes an order to provide the requested information upon the charging party’s request, irrespective of whether intervening events may have created new potential defenses to providing the requested information. (Butte-Glenn Community College District (2022) PERB Decision No. 2834, p. 19; Children of Promise Preparatory Academy (2019) PERB Order No. Ad-473, pp. 4-5.) (pp. 14-15.) more or view all topics or full text. |
07/01/26 | ||
| 2891M |
City and County of San Francisco
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The Board ordered the City to provide the union with the 2016-2019 information it sought, including disaggregated race/ethnicity data. PERB acknowledged that information from 2016-2019 is no longer the most useful data set for SEIU to fulfill its statutory purposes, but that PERB will rarely find that an RFI becomes moot, lest the delay of litigation end up allowing respondents to avoid their duties. (Butte-Glenn Community College District (2022) PERB Decision No. 2834, p. 19.) Accordingly, the Board required the City to provide both the data originally requested as well as a current version thereof if requested. (County of Ventura (2018) PERB Decision No. 2600-M, pp. 44 & 46.) (pp. 22-23.) more or view all topics or full text. |
48 | 132 | 02/27/24 |
| 2830Sa |
State of California (State Water Resources Control Board)
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Where the state employer failed to provide the union with sufficient information for it to meaningfully represent an employee in an investigatory interview, the Board supplemented the proposed decision’s cease and desist order by directing the state employer to refrain from relying on: (1) any information or admission obtained during the unlawful investigatory interview; or (2) the employee’s conduct during the interview. While the record did not show that the employer had so far relied on any such information, admission, or conduct, to compensate for the harm caused by the unfair practice, the Board found it important to ensure that the Water Board does not do so in the future. (pp. 6-7.) more or view all topics or full text. |
47 | 160 | 05/02/23 |
| 2834E |
Butte-Glenn Community College District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The appropriate remedy in cases involving a failure to provide information typically includes a cease-and-desist order and an order to provide the requested information upon the charging party’s request. (State of California (Department of State Hospitals) (2018) PERB Decision No. 2568-S, pp. 16-18; Regents of the University of California (Davis) (2010) PERB Decision No. 2101-H, p. 37; see also Children of Promise Preparatory Academy (2019) PERB Order No. Ad-473, pp. 4-5 [responding party must provide requested information based upon its duties when its obligation first arose, irrespective of whether intervening events may have created new potential defenses to providing the requested information].) (p. 19.) more or view all topics or full text. |
47 | 68 | 10/07/22 |
| 2438E |
Los Angeles Unified School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
When a union has offered to enter into a confidentiality agreement wherein the union will agree to limit the use and dissemination of requested information for representation and bargaining purposes only,” and the District rejects such offer, the offer is sufficient to address the District’s concerns that the information will be disseminated, and it is appropriate for the Board to include in the order a requirement of a confidentiality agreement in accordance with the terms proposed by the union applicable to the union and its agents and employees. more or view all topics or full text. |
40 | 26 | 06/25/15 |
| 2423M |
County of San Bernardino (Office of the Public Defender)
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
An employer’s refusal to provide a union upon request a physical document relevant to the union’s role as collective bargaining representative is not excused by the employer’s assertion that the information is on the internet, when the employer presents no evidence of what may or may not have been “on the internet” at the time of the request, whether it was responsive to the union’s request, whether it was up to date, or whether it conveyed what the employer intended to convey to the union. more or view all topics or full text. |
39 | 165 | 05/15/15 |
| 2112I |
Los Angeles Superior Court
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
No violation where employer complied with request and the union does not allege that it reasserted its request or otherwise communicated its dissatisfaction with the employer’s response. No violation where the union requested the employer provide information related to the basis for the elimination of regular assignments. Although the charge made reference to a comprehensive study by the employer to determine staffing needs, the charge does not include facts to establish such a study was completed or that the employer was in fact in possession of any relevant “written documents, reports, assignment data or analysis.” The employer need not comply with an information request if the requested information does not exist. Moreover, the employer is not obligated to provide details as to the thought process or rationale underlying managerial decisions. more or view all topics or full text. |
34 | 94 | 06/07/10 |
| 1891M |
City of Los Altos
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
The union was entitled to information that was necessary and relevant to discharging its duty to represent unit employees, not to all information that could conceivably aid the union in its representation duties. PERB has held that there is no duty to provide information absent a request, thus the Union’s concession that it had no pending request for identified information was pivotal, because without a request, Local 350 had no right to the disciplinary information which they argued they were entitled to as a matter of course. more or view all topics or full text. |
31 | 74 | 03/14/07 |
| 1388S |
State of California (Department of Corrections)
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
In order to implement its reorganization plan, the Department had to have some interim plans regarding changes in staffing. Although the Department did not need to furnish information in a form more organized than its own records, it should have provided whatever interim information it had to the Association. Its failure to do so violated the Dills Act. more or view all topics or full text. |
24 | 31107 | 05/25/00 |
| 1262E |
Bakersfield City School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
Interim remedy of requiring employer to facilite union's communications with unit members while parties negotiate over mechanisim to provide home address may be commendable but in practical terms interjects the Board deeply into the internal administrative practices of the District. The Board declines to such remedy and leaves the mechanism of providing information to the parties negotiations. more or view all topics or full text. |
22 | 29089 | 04/28/98 |
| 0834E |
Chula Vista City School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
District ordered to inform association about information available and provide information requested and bargain in good faith over costs if necessary. District ordered to accept and process grievances from Association and recognize association's right to seek unit modifications. more or view all topics or full text. |
14 | 21162 | 08/16/90 |
| 0518E |
Modesto City Schools and High School District
1205.12000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Provision of Information
District ordered to provide information it refused to provide during grievance process and to refrain from imposing procedural objections to processing of grievance. more or view all topics or full text. |
9 | 16198 | 08/26/85 |