All notes for Subtopic 407.04000 – Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2648M | City of Arcadia 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality An employer’s duty of strict neutrality extends to internal union affairs, even in the absence of a competing employee organization. But an employer is not liable for interference, domination, unlawful assistance, or discrimination where it merely attempts in good faith to comply with its duty to bargain—which may require it to recognize one candidate on an interim basis pending the outcome of internal union procedures or other litigation between the factions—irrespective of whether the employer ends up temporarily recognizing the “wrong” candidate based on the outcome of such procedures. more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 1 | 06/12/19 |
| 2648M | City of Arcadia 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Employer found to have interfered with internal Association affairs by offering an incentive for a change in internal Association leadership. more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 1 | 06/12/19 |
| I057M | City of Fremont 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality The MMBA prohibits public agencies from interfering with the formation and administration of any employee organization, or to encourage employees to join any employee organization in preference to another. Where two employee organizations are competing for the right to represent the same employees, the employer must remain neutral. If an employer does not maintain neutrality, the employer is deemed to encourage employees to prefer one organization over another, which violates the employees’ right to choose an organization free of employer interference. In assessing such conduct, the Board asks whether the employer’s conduct tends to influence employee free choice of organization. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 68 | 10/25/13 |
| 2145M | West Contra Costa Healthcare District 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Employer did not violate its duty of strict neutrality during a decertification election campaign when it failed to prevent non-employee organizers from the union seeking to decertify the incumbent from accessing non-public areas of the employer’s hospital on every occasion. The employer responded promptly to each of the incumbent union’s complaints about unauthorized access by the rival union. Nor did the employer’s requirement that non-employee organizers of the incumbent union, but not the rival union, sign in and wear identification badges to access non-public areas violate the duty of strict neutrality because the requirement affirmed the incumbent’s status as the exclusive representative and did not tend to influence employees to support the rival union. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 5 | 11/30/10 |
| 1912H | Regents of the University of California 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality There were no facts establishing that any misconduct occurred immediately preceding and during the pendency of a union petition for recognition. The fact that another union may have been prevented from petitioning for certification a few days after another union’s certification did not demonstrate a violation of section 3565. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 117 | 06/26/07 |
| 1840M | County of Santa Cruz 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Two week delay in implementing dues deduction does not appear unreasonable and does not violate MMBA. Nothing indicates an attempt to interfere with union politics or sway favor away from exclusive representative. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 122 | 05/17/06 |
| 1669M | Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality District’s letter to employees informing them of deficiencies in decertification petition and provision to employees of applicable rules and regulations governing decertification petitions do not constitute unlawful assistance. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 213 | 07/28/04 |
| 1506E | Santa Clarita Community College District (College of the Canyons) 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality PERB Reg. 32781 does not allow an employer to enter into an agreement with an employee organization to accrete into an existing unit unrepresented employees where those employees are the subject of a current organizing drive by a rival employee organization. District’s agreement constituted unlawful interference in violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 35 | 01/08/03 |
| 1543E | Victor Valley Community College District 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Board found that community college district unlawfully demonstrated preference to the union representing 140 full-time faculty by allowing it to accrete 350 part-time faculty members into the unit, while the district was aware that a rival union had already begun organizing the part-time faculty. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 111 | 07/23/03 |
| 1428H | Regents of the University of California 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Employer not obligated to advise exclusive representatives that employees have been granted access to webpage space even where employees are using it to oppose agency fee. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32059 | 04/19/01 |
| 1278E | Long Beach Community College District (California School Employees Association) 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Where employer included rival employee organization's severance presentation on the official schedule for a week of mandatory peace officer training on the day before window period began, the Board found that the employer's actions gave the impression that the severance presentation was part of the mandatory training or, at the very least, that the employer supported the severance presentation, in violation of employer's duty of strict neutrality; p. 9. Employer statement that decertification presentation was voluntary was insufficient to undo the effects of the employer's decision to place the decertification presentation on the schedule for mandatory in- service training. Employer made statement just before the start of the decertification presentation but made no effort to retract the offending training schedule and took no other action to assuage the appearance that it supported the decertification effort; pp. 10-11. offending training schedule and took no other action to assuage the appearance that it supported the decertification effort; pp. 10-11. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29147 | 08/14/98 |
| 1112E | Rocklin Teachers Professional Association (Romero) 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality A public school employer must maintain "strict neutrality" in the face of organizational activity and may restrict the participation of supervisory employees in the preelection activities of nonsupervisory employees in order to maintain a position of neutrality; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26122 | 08/10/95 |
| 0601S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration, Developmental Services, and Mental Health); State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (Communications Workers of America/California Association of Psychiatric Technicians) 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Letter from the employer recognizing rival union as an "employee organization," per section 3513(a) is not unlawful support. Posting of letter by management listing names of rival union suggests management support for that union and is a violation of section 3519(d) breaching the requirement of strict neutrality; pp. 76-77, P.D. It is not favortism to rationally regulate use of meeting rooms. Reduction of recognized bargaining agent's bulletin board space does violate section 3519(a) and (b), but is not unlawful support for rival union; pp. 88, P.D. Statements by supervisors that the rival union should win the election or was much better than incumbent union constitute unlawful interference and support for rival; pp. 89-94, P.D. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18020 | 12/30/86 |
| 0533E | Office of Kern County Superintendent of Schools 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Employer impermissibly favored rival union in decertification drive by indicating that benefits would remain same if rival union certified. Interference in decertification campaign found where supervisor, during work hours, circulated a "letter of concern" which supported the rival union. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16237 | 06/09/85 |
| 0920S | State of California (Office of Lieutenant Governor) 407.04000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION; Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality Board affirms dismissal of charge that Lt. Gov.'s office violated section 3519(d) of Dills Act when Lt. Gov. sent congratulatory letter to organizer of decertification effort against charging party, on grounds the Lt. Gov. not an employer under Dills. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23027 | 01/14/92 |