All notes for Subtopic 1307.01000 – In General/Definition
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A491E | Alliance Morgan McKinzie High School et al. 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition PERB determines unit appropriateness based on the facts present when the petitions were filed. (Alliance I, supra, PERB Decision No. 2719, p. 27, fn. 27, citing Children of Promise, supra, PERB Order No. Ad-402, p. 14.) Because the reorganization the Schools argued governed against finding the unit appropriate was not effective until about eight months after the petitions were filed, the Schools’ argument exceeds the scope of our inquiry. (p. 14.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 141 | 03/23/22 |
| 2719E | Alliance Judy Ivie Burton Technology Academy High, et al. 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The Board must process the petition for recognition that an employee organization actually filed and will generally make unit determinations based on the facts present on the date of filing of the petition. (Pages 27-28.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 185 | 05/18/20 |
| 2667P | San Diego Metropolitan Transit System 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The transit district enabling acts generally grant SMCS jurisdiction to resolve questions concerning representation (QCR), including determinations of appropriate bargaining units. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 60 | 09/06/19 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The Office of the General Counsel correctly relied on the estimated figure of 325 affected employees, as stated in the union’s petition for unit modification, rather than the employer’s estimates of how many employees would eventually be reclassified into the affected classifications. (pp. 21-22.) Proof of support is determined by PERB when a petition is filed and an employer provides a list of employees that comprise the petitioned-for unit or the proposed unit modification. The employer is in the unique position of having sole access to the pertinent information, including which employees perform what duties and under which job titles. Where the employer is unable or unwilling to produce complete and accurate lists of employees in a proposed unit at the time, it is impossible for PERB to verify a showing of support or, as in the present case, whether such a showing is required. In such circumstances, the Board agent conducting the investigation may make reasonable assumptions about the proposed unit or unit modification, including that the number of affected employees estimated by the party of interest applicant is accurate. (Ibid.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition Because HEERA does not itself mandate an election where an established unit is modified, it is within the Board’s discretion to adopt and interpret regulations defining under what circumstances an election is appropriate, or conversely, removing the Board’s discretion to require an election under specified circumstances. The PERB-administered statutes recognize that employee choice is not absolute, but must be balanced against the other policy objectives identified by the Legislature, including establishing “orderly and clearly defined procedures for meeting and conferring and the resolution of impasses.” (p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The Board rejected the University’s appeal arguing that a union petitioning for unit modification should be required to show proof of support under PERB Regulation 32781 because, when the petition was filed, the University had not yet completed the process of reclassifying unrepresented employees and it projected to reclassify a significant number of additional employees into the new classification. (p. 14.) The administrative determination appropriately reasoned that the proposed addition sought by a unit modification petition at the time the petition is filed is determinative and “not whether the proposed addition grows or shrinks after the time the petition is filed.” (pp. 13-14.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition Pursuant to PERB Regulations, the Board may expedite a unit modification case arising under PERB Regulation 32781. Because the present dispute is a cause of great concern to the parties and affected employees, PERB processed the case on an expedited basis in effort to promote stable employer-employee relations, and thereby effectuate the policies and purpose of HEERA. (p. 17.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The Board affirmed prior PERB precedent holding that the language of PERB Regulation 32781 eliminates the Board’s discretion to require proof of majority support when a unit modification petition seeks to add classifications which would increase the size of the existing unit by less than ten percent. (pp. 6-7.) PERB Regulation 32781, which governs petitions for unit modification, provides, in relevant part, that if a unit modification petition “requests the addition of classifications or positions to an established unit, and the proposed addition would increase the size of the established unit by ten percent or more, the Board shall require proof of majority support of persons employed in the classifications or positions to be added.” (pp. 4-5.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A453H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition By adopting a regulation providing that an increase in the size of a bargaining unit by ten percent or more through the addition of unrepresented positions creates a question concerning representation, the “necessary implication is that increasing the unit by less than ten percent does not call into question the incumbent union’s majority support,” and that the agency is without discretion to require a showing of support in such circumstances. (p. 8.) PERB’s unit modification procedures are inconsistent with the NLRB’s accretion doctrine because the plain language and the policies of HEERA and PERB Regulation 32781 differ in significant respects from their private-sector counterparts. PERB cannot change its regulations through decisional law. (pp. 8-9.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 47 | 09/29/17 |
| A431E | Imagine Schools at Imperial Valley 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition PERB conducts elections, including decertification elections, to facilitate employees’ free choice on questions concerning representation. (International Union of Operating Engineers, State of California Locals 3, 12, 39 and 501, AFL-CIO (California State Employees’ Association, SEIU, AFL-CIO) (1984) PERB Decision No. 390-S. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 120 | 01/13/16 |
| 2113M | County of Siskiyou/Siskiyou County Superior Court 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition When an employee organization affiliates with or disaffiliates from another organization, a question concerning representation exists unless there is “substantial continuity” of representation and identity between the pre- and post-(dis)affiliated union. Because petitioner employee organization failed to establish substantial continuity with pre-disaffiliation local, question concerning representation existed that could only be resolved through local agency’s decertification procedures. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 95 | 06/07/10 |
| 2107H | Regents of the University of California 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition PERB Regulation 32781(e)(1) codifies the Board’s determination in past decisions that increasing the size of an established bargaining unit by 10 percent or more necessarily creates a question concerning representation. Conversely, adding positions totaling less than 10 percent of the existing unit does not call into question the incumbent union’s majority support. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 81 | 05/10/10 |
| 1816M | Antelope Valley Health Care District 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition SMCS responsible under Government Code 3507.1(c) to verify petitioner’s majority status. In absence of SMCS decision, PERB will determine whether District unreasonably withheld recognition under 3507(c). more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 60 | 02/10/06 |
| A336M | Coachella Valley Mosquito and Vector Control District 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The 30-day time period under PERB Regulation 60000 is not a jurisdictional statute of limitations. Late filings may be excused for good cause under Regulation 32136. Good cause was not established here because filing party failed to read Regulation 60000. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 137 | 05/12/04 |
| A215E | South County Community College District . . . See Ad-130 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The appropriate test for determining whether a question concerning representation exists in a case of affiliation or disaffiliation is the NLRB's traditional substantial continuity and due process analysis. The focus of the substantial continuity inquiry is to determine whether the disaffiliation substantially changed the Union. The focus of the due process analysis is to determine whether the election was conducted with adequate safeguards, including notice of election, and adequate opportunity for members to discuss the election and reasonable precautions to maintain ballot secrecy. In accord with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NLRB v. Financial Institution Employees, the local association is within its rights as an employee organization to limit the vote on the decision to affiliate or disaffiliate with another organization, to its members only. An amendment of certification is appropriate to reflect the disaffiliation where (1) the changes resulting from the disaffiliation were not sufficiently dramitic to alter the local organization's identity; and (2) the disaffiliation election was conducted with adequate due process safeguards in accordance with the organization's constitution. Such changes in certification are not appropriate where, as a result of that change, a question concerning representation is created. QCR defined as sufficient doubt about the union's continuing status as the legitimate representative of employees in a particular unit such that a new election should be conducted to determine employee sentiment. Substantial continuity where officers and negotiator remained the same. Change in dues structure, modification of constitution and loss of affiliate; services did not alter substantial continuity. Due process does not require a vote of all members of the bargaining unit just union members. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21202 | 10/26/90 |
| A216E | San Jose-Evergreen Community College District 1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition The appropriate test for determining whether a question concerning representation exists in a case of affiliation or disaffiliation is the NLRB's traditional substantial continuity and due process analysis; pp. 9-10, proposed dec. The focus of the substantial continuity inquiry is to determine whether the affiliation substantially changed the union; p. 9, proposed dec. The focus of the due process inquiry is to determine whether the election was conducted with adequate safeguards, including notice of election, and adequate opportunity for members to discuss the election and reasonable precautions to maintain ballot secrecy; p. 9, proposed dec. In accord with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in NLRB v. Financial Institution Employees, the local association is within its rights as an employee organization to limit the vote on the decision to affiliate or disaffiliate with another organization, to its members an employee organization to limit the vote on the decision to affiliate or disaffiliate with another organization, to its members exclusive representative include the originally certified union's interaction with management and the ability of the local members to control the actions of the union's officers; pp. 8-9. Certain changes due to an associations' disaffiliation, such as changes in dues structure, are inherent in a reorganization and should not be afforded significant weight. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21203 | 10/29/90 |