All notes for Subtopic 1309.14000 – Splitting of Classifications
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
HEERA contains a presumption against splitting occupational groups, but no presumption against splitting classifications. Rather, HEERA requires PERB to consider the impact of dividing a classification. (Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order Ad-525-H, pp. 19-22.) PERB’s functional approach means that “keeping an occupational group together can lead to splitting a title or classification.” (Id. at p. 22.) Accordingly, petitioning union could amend its petition to include only Health Educators who serve patients at UC medical centers and exclude Health Educators who serve students and are included in a newly created “Student Services and Advising Professionals” unit represented by a different union. (pp. 13-14.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A525H |
Regents of the University of California
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
Where PERB orders a unit modification or other unit determination that requires an employer to split a classification, PERB normally leaves to collective bargaining any retitling that one or both parties may believe is wise. (See, e.g., Regents of the University of California (2010) PERB Decision No. 2107-H, p. 3, fn.3, & pp. 29-30 [splitting Administrative Nurse classification without retitling]; see also Alum Rock Union Elementary School District (1983) PERB Decision No. 322, pp. 13-15 [retitling is a mandatory bargaining topic].) The impacted employees’ ultimate title is a mandatory subject of bargaining. Nonetheless, PERB retitled the accreted positions as “Math Fellows,” as a default title pending bargaining. (pp. 35-36.) more or view all topics or full text. |
49 | 152 | 03/17/25 |
| A525H |
Regents of the University of California
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
In determining which of two competing unit configurations was most appropriate under HEERA, the Board (1) must consider the impact of dividing a classification (Govt. Code, § 3579(a)(2)); and (2) must apply a rebuttable presumption against dividing occupational groups (§ 3579(c)). While HEERA does not define the phrase “occupational group” found in section 3579(c), PERB does not interpret it to mean the same thing as “classification,” since that would render superfluous part of section 3579(a)(2). Analogous logic dictates that there is no presumption against splitting a classification; rather, HEERA merely instructs PERB to consider the impacts of splitting a classification. (§ 3579(a)(2).) The presumption against splitting occupational groups fits best with the other unit determination criteria in section 3579 (including the community of interest factors found in section 3579(a)(1)) when PERB applies the presumption functionally rather than mechanistically. Under PERB’s functional approach, an “occupational group” (such as employees performing case management) can potentially include parts of multiple classifications (such as RNs and social workers), in which case keeping an occupational group together can lead to splitting a title or classification. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text. |
49 | 152 | 03/17/25 |
| 2788M |
City of Pasadena
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
While there is no bright line rule against splitting classifications where other factors warrant it, PERB generally disfavors splitting a single classification across multiple units when the employees within the same classification perform the same work under virtually identical conditions of employment. (Oakland Unified School District (2016) PERB Decision No. 2509, at pp. 19-20.) The City reasonably found that this factor cut against granting the severance petition. If the severance request was granted, two classifications would be divided among two bargaining units, the two classifications’ job duties are common across all City departments, and there is no distinction in their work, whether they are assigned to the Police Department or any other City department. more or view all topics or full text. |
46 | 61 | 09/01/21 |
| 2509E |
Oakland Unified School District
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
The Board has interpreted EERA to disfavor splitting a single classification across multiple units when the employees within the classification perform the same work under virtually identical conditions of employment. more or view all topics or full text. |
41 | 111 | 12/29/16 |
| 1086E |
San Francisco Unified School District
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
EERA does not preclude in every case an employee's placement in more than one bargaining unit. An employee holding two positions with the same employer might well be included in two separate bargaining units representated by two different exclusive representatives; p. 28, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. |
19 | 26064 | 03/01/95 |
| 0820E |
Hemet Unified School District
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
Individual analysis approach appropriate in unit modification case where same disputed position is held by several different employees at different work sites; pp. 6-9. more or view all topics or full text. |
14 | 21132 | 06/26/90 |