All notes for Subtopic 602.02000 – Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2799M | County of Santa Clara 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Even when an employer has no obligation to bargain over a particular decision, it nonetheless must provide notice and an opportunity to meet and confer over any reasonably foreseeable effects the decision may have on matters within the scope of representation. (County of Santa Clara (2019) PERB Decision No. 2680-M, pp. 11-12.) The employer violates its duty to bargain if it fails to provide adequate advance notice, and in such circumstances the union need not demand to bargain effects as a prerequisite to filing an unfair practice charge. (County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M, pp. 30-32.) However, where an employer does provide adequate notice, the union must request to bargain any reasonably foreseeable effects on negotiable matters. (Id. at p. 30.) The union’s request to bargain need not be formalistic or burdensome, nor anticipate every imaginable effect a proposed change may have, but rather must only identify negotiable areas of impact, thereby placing the employer on notice that it believes the employer’s proposed decision would affect one or more negotiable topics. (County of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2315-M, p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 94 | 12/20/21 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where the District repudiated parties’ MOU by requiring employees to participate in hybrid instruction during 2020-2021 school year, the Federation was not required to meet with the District regarding implementation of the decision. (County of Merced (2020) PERB Decision No. 2740-M, p. 20 [employer’s fait accompli obviates any requirement that union pursue negotiations]; Standard School District (2005) PERB Decision No. 1775, adopting proposed decision at p. 16 [bargaining party had no duty to pursue negotiations from position the other party unlawfully changed].) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain An employer must meet and confer over alternatives to the decision as part of effects bargaining. (County of Sonoma (2021) PERB Decision No. 2772-M, p. 54 (Sonoma) [judicial appeal pending]; Anaheim Union High School District (2016) PERB Decision No. 2504, pp. 10-11, 15 & adopting proposed decision at p. 41; City of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2351-M, p. 22.) Thus, one purpose of effects bargaining is to permit the exclusive representative an opportunity to persuade the employer to consider alternatives that may diminish the impact of the decision on employees. (Sonoma, supra, PERB Decision No. 2772-M, p. 55; San Mateo City School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 383, p. 18.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where neither party declared impasse in effects negotiations---much less exhausted EERA’s post-impasse procedures, any claimed right to implement an allegedly non-negotiable decision before exhausting such impasse procedures would be contingent on evidence of an immutable deadline or important managerial interest, as well on the employer negotiating in good faith prior to and after implementation. (Compton Community College District (1989) PERB Decision No. 720, pp. 14-15.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where an employer has an obligation to meet and confer over reasonably foreseeable effects a decision, an employer may implement its decision before completing effects bargaining if it can establish each of three elements: (1) the implementation date was based on an immutable deadline or an important managerial interest, such that a delay in implementation beyond the date chosen would effectively undermine the employer’s right to make the decision; (2) the employer gave sufficient advance notice of the decision and implementation date to allow for meaningful negotiations prior to implementation; and (3) the employer negotiated in good faith prior to and after implementation. (Compton Community College District (1989) PERB Decision No. 720, pp. 14-15.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Even when an employer has no obligation to bargain over a particular decision, it nonetheless must provide notice and an opportunity to meet and confer over any reasonably foreseeable effects the decision may have on matters within the scope of representation. (County of Santa Clara (2019) PERB Decision No. 2680-M, pp. 11-12.) The employer violates this duty if it fails to provide adequate advance notice, and in such circumstances the union need not request to bargain effects as a prerequisite to filing an unfair practice charge. (County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M, pp. 30-32.) However, where an employer does provide adequate notice, the union must request to bargain any reasonably foreseeable effects on negotiable matters. (Id. at p. 30.) The union’s request to bargain need not be formalistic or burdensome, nor anticipate every imaginable effect a proposed change may have, but must only identify negotiable areas of impact, thereby placing the employer on notice that it believes the employer’s proposed decision would affect one or more negotiable topics. (County of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2315-M, p. 9; Rio Hondo Community College District (2013) PERB Decision No. 2313, p. 13.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2803E | Oxnard Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain District deviated from MOU when it told the Federation it was instituting new employment terms as a fait accompli, without first having raised its staffing concern and bargained in good faith over alternative ideas. When the exclusive representative first learns of a change after the decision has been made, “by definition, there has been inadequate notice.” (City of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2351-M, p. 33.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 110 | 01/26/22 |
| 2772Ma | County of Sonoma 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Public agencies must comply with the MMBA’s meet-and-confer requirement before submitting to voters an initiative affecting matters within the scope of representation. An employer’s obligation to provide adequate notice and opportunity to meet and confer is identical for both “a decision involving a negotiable subject [and] a negotiable effect of a non-negotiable decision.” The County failed to provide the Associations sufficient notice or opportunity to meet and confer over the decision to place Measure P on the ballot where the Associations first learned of the decision immediately before the County Board of Supervisors voted to place the measure on the ballot. The County also provided insufficient notice or opportunity to meet and confer over effects of the decision because the Board of Supervisors’ vote constituted implementation of the decision. (pp. 28-29.) more or view all topics or full text. | 47 | 127 | 02/28/23 |
| 2852H | Regents of the University of California 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Although the amount of time varies depending on the circumstances of each case, “an employer must give notice sufficiently in advance of reaching a firm decision to allow the representative an opportunity to consult its members and decide whether to request information, demand bargaining, acquiesce to the change, or take other action.” Here, UC-AFT first learned of the University’s new concurrent employment policy when UC Santa Cruz announced the implementation of the policy in its November 25, 2020 letter. Indeed, UC Santa Cruz had already implemented the policy when it rescinded a lecturer appointment the prior month. The Board thus had no difficulty concluding that the University did not provide UC-AFT adequate notice or opportunity to meet and confer over UC Santa Cruz’s decision to adopt the concurrent appointment policy. (pp. 17-18.) more or view all topics or full text. | 47 | 121 | 02/09/23 |
| 2783H | Regents of the University of California 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The University issued the Executive Order mandating influenza vaccinations on July 31, but did not provide notice of the change to Charging Parties until August 7. The University clearly did not give Charging Parties advance notice or an opportunity to meet and confer before reaching a firm decision. (p. 22.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 38 | 07/26/21 |
| 2772M | County of Sonoma * * * VACATED IN PART by County of Sonoma (2023) PERB Decision No. 2772a-M * * * 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain County Board of Supervisors (BOS) gave affected employee organizations no notice that it would vote to place a ballot measure on the November 2020 ballot; Associations first learned of the County Board of Supervisors’ potential vote immediately before it occurred. Placement of a ballot measure on the ballot on the last day to do so deprived the Associations of their statutory right to meet and confer prior to the BOS arriving at a determination of policy or course of action on the amendments within the scope of representation, as the measure could not be amended prior to the election or after the ballot measure passed. (p. 49.) more or view all topics or full text. | 46 | 8 | 06/23/21 |
| 2680M | County of Santa Clara 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain A union is not required to demand to bargain effects where the employer has failed in its duty to provide notice prior to implementing the change. (p. 12.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 86 | 10/31/19 |
| 2680M | County of Santa Clara 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where an exclusive representative becomes aware of an employer’s proposed policy change after implementation of that change, by definition, there has been inadequate notice. (pp. 8-9.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 86 | 10/31/19 |
| 2701I | Region 2 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer’s offer to meet and confer with the exclusive representative over the elimination of a stipend after notifying the representative that it would stop making the payments does not ameliorate its unilateral change in past practice. When the exclusive representative first learns of a negotiable change after the decision has been made, by definition, there has been inadequate notice. (p. 56.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 150 | 03/16/20 |
| 2701I | Region 2 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Even if an employer’s decision is nonnegotiable, it must meet and confer over any foreseeable effects the decision may have on matters within the scope of representation. Once the employer makes a firm decision, it must provide the exclusive representative notice and a reasonable opportunity to negotiate prior to taking action that affects matters within the scope of representation. Upon receiving notice of the proposed change, the exclusive representative must make a valid request to bargain any foreseeable effects of the change on negotiable matters. Generally, an employer may not implement the nonnegotiable decision until the parties have reached agreement or impasse over the negotiable effects of the decision. (p. 47.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 150 | 03/16/20 |
| 2610H | Regents of the University of California (Berkeley) (University Council-American Federation of Teachers) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The University failed to provide UC-AFT with adequate notice of its decision to outsource the Young Musician’s Program. By no later than March 6, 2013, the University’s principal decisionmaker acted in consultation with the Young Musician Program’s director and its advisory board to transfer the Program to an outside entity. At that time, the University had not advised UC-AFT of the Program’s impending closure nor that it planned to continue the Program under the auspices of a non-University entity. (pp. 33-34.) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 100 | 12/19/18 |
| 2610H | Regents of the University of California (Berkeley) (University Council-American Federation of Teachers) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Like the other PERB-administered statutes, the statutory scheme under HEERA presumes that notice of changes to negotiable matters will be provided “in a meaningful manner at a meaningful time.” (City of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2351-M, pp. 29-30.) What constitutes meaningful notice will necessarily vary depending on the circumstances of each case, but, at minimum, an employer must give notice sufficiently in advance of reaching a firm decision to allow the representative an opportunity to consult its members and decide whether to request information, demand bargaining, acquiesce to the change, or take other action. By any measure, the University failed to provide UC-AFT with meaningful notice of the decision to transfer the Young Musician’s Program’s operations to a non-University entity. As early as November 2012, the University’s principal decisionmaker asked the campus general counsel to research two options, “each of which would get [the Program] out from under all the personnel issues without damaging the program.” Despite having decided as early as March 2013 to have the Program separate from the University, a University Labor Relations Specialist advised UC-AFT in April 2013 that the University was “seriously considering whether it should continue with the [Program].” In May 2013, the University informed UC-AFT that it had decided to close the Program, effective June 1, 2013. Throughout these communications, the University made no mention of its plans to subcontract or “transfer” the Program’s operations to a successor organization. By the time UC-AFT learned of the University’s decision to transfer the Program to the successor program (as opposed to simply closing it), the transfer was already well underway. (pp. 45-47.) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 100 | 12/19/18 |
| 2684E | Modoc County Office of Education 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain When the exclusive representative first learns of a change after the decision has been made, “by definition, there has been inadequate notice.” [Citation.] (p. 10.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 104 | 11/27/19 |
| 2615M | County of Kern 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain When an employer finalizes its decision to change a policy before providing the union with notice and an opportunity to bargain, a union is not obligated to request bargaining, nor to accept any employer offer to meet and confer that is made after the employer has already reached a firm decision. (p. 11.) Employer offer to meet and confer inadequate if employer did not restore the status quo, which is a necessary condition for meaningful bargaining to occur. (City of San Ramon, supra, PERB Decision No. 2571-M, p. 15 [good faith bargaining is not possible when employer has already “imposed the very terms under discussion, thereby forcing [the union] to start from a position of having to talk the [employer] back to the status quo.”].) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 109 | 12/21/18 |
| 2321M | County of Santa Clara 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The employer has a duty to provide reasonable notice and an opportunity to bargain before it implements a decision within its managerial prerogative that has foreseeable effects on negotiable terms and conditions of employment. “Reasonable” notice is one which is clear and unequivocal and which clearly informs the employee organization of the nature and scope of the proposed change. Once having reasonable notice and an opportunity to bargain before the employer implements a decision within its managerial prerogative that has foreseeable effects on negotiable terms and conditions of employment, the union must demand to bargain the effects or risk waiving its right to do so. The union’s demand must identify clearly the matter(s) within the scope of representation on which it proposes to bargain, and clearly indicate the employee organization’s desire to bargain over the effects of the decision as opposed to the decision itself. Where a union alleges that the employer did not provide reasonable notice and an opportunity to bargain prior to the employer’s implementation of a change in a non-negotiable policy having a reasonably foreseeable impact on a matter within the scope of representation, a prima face case of failure to bargain in good faith is established. A union’s duty to request effects bargaining arises upon an employer’s providing notice and an opportunity to bargain. Where an employer implements without providing the requisite notice and bargaining opportunity this conduct by itself violates the employer’s statutory duty to meet and confer, whether or not the union thereafter makes a demand for effects bargaining. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 30 | 07/25/13 |
| 2443M | City of Milpitas 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The City Council’s adoption of the City Manager’s outsourcing and layoffs recommendation just six weeks after the union president’s e-mail requesting to bargain and before the parties had bargained or reached impasse, constitutes a change in City policy regarding outsourcing without giving the union an opportunity to bargain over the change. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 36 | 07/29/15 |
| 2333E | Saddleback Valley Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Union had prior notice based on the District’s last, best and final offer of the methodology for implementing a retroactive salary schedule decrease and the District was free to implement that methodology when it imposed the terms of the factfinder report or its last, best and final offer on August 31, 2010. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 52 | 10/07/13 |
| 2351M | City of Sacramento 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain When an exclusive representative becomes aware of a proposed change after the employer has implemented it, any notice to negotiate is inadequate. The employer violated its duty to bargain by making a firm decision to transfer bargaining unit work and layoff unit employees, and by using direct communications with unit employees to implement that decision, without providing the exclusive representative with adequate notice and meaningful opportunity to bargain. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 104 | 12/24/13 |
| 2287H | Trustees of the California State University 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Under HEERA, before implementing a non-negotiable decision, the parties must first negotiate over effects that have an impact on matters within the scope of bargaining. Once a firm decision is made, an employer must provide the exclusive representative with notice and a reasonable opportunity to negotiate prior to taking action that affects matters within the scope of representation. When claiming that an employer’s non-negotiable decision will have an effect on a subject within the scope of bargaining, the charging party bears the burden of alleging facts demonstrating a reasonably foreseeable impact on employees’ working conditions. Because bargaining over effects contemplates that negotiations will occur prior to implementation of the non-negotiable decision, the parties must assess the effects of the decision prospectively, without the benefit of hindsight. Where the employee organization has made a timely demand for bargaining on an issue within the scope of bargaining, the employee has the following three choices: (1) accede to the demand and address the employee organization’s concerns in negotiations; (2) ask the employee organization for its negotiation justification; or (3) refuse the employee organization’s demand. In choosing the third option, the employer does so at its peril if its refusal is later determined to be unjustified. Union met its burden of establishing a prima facie case of failure to bargain effects of management decision to implement executive order governing student mental health services, where request identified reasonably foreseeable impact on workload, thereby triggering duty to bargain potential impacts prior to implementation. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 79 | 10/04/12 |
| 2296M | City of Long Beach 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Given the overwhelming acceptance of the concept of impasse as a term of art central to labor relations, the definition of impasse under EERA, as interpreted by PERB, is appropriate under the MMBA as well. Evidence did not support conclusion that parties reached a point at which further negotiations would be futile. Thus, regardless of whether or not employer formally declared impasse or presented a “last, best and final offer,” an impasse did not exist as of the date of implementation of furloughs. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 130 | 12/04/12 |
| 2262E | Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain General publication of a governing board agenda does not constitute effective notice to exclusive representative of proposed changes. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 176 | 05/08/12 |
| 2196S | State of California (Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Avenal State Prison) * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Trustees of the California State University (2012) PERB Decision No. 2287-H and County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M * * * 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Trustees of California State University (2012) PERB Decision No. 2287-H, where the Board held that a demand to bargain effects merely needs to identify potential prospective effects, not actual effects, and County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M, where the Board held that a union does not need to demand to bargain effects, if the employer does not provide reasonable advance notice of the employer’s decision. * * *In order to state a prima facie case of failure to bargain over the effects of a non-negotiable management decision, the employee organization must demonstrate that it made a valid request to negotiate over identifiable, reasonably foreseeable, and negotiable effects of the decision. In the absence of such a request, an employer who implements a nonnegotiable decision without prior notice does not violate the duty to bargain. Ideally, if the employer reasonably anticipates that its decision will have negotiable effects, it will provide sufficient notice prior to implementation to afford an opportunity for negotiation. However, where the employer does not reasonably anticipate any negotiable effects and therefore implements with little or no prior notice, the union may still demand bargaining after implementation, provided it can identify any negotiable effects. In such cases, once the union is aware of the change, the failure to give formal notice is of no legal import. Moreover, the union does not waive its right to bargain by failing to request bargaining prior to implementation. Nonetheless, the union must still make a valid request to negotiate that clearly identifies the negotiable effects of the decision. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 30 | 08/12/11 |
| 2152S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain No violation of the Dills Act where the Legislature ratified the Governor’s initial furlough plan when it adopted the Budget Act. The Dills Act does not limit the Legislature’s authority to enact unilateral changes in terms and conditions of employment. The Governor does not commit an unlawful unilateral change by implementing changes to terms and conditions of State employment in compliance with law as prescribed by the legislative process. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 17 | 12/16/10 |
| 2125M | County of Fresno 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain No duty to bargain the implementation of furloughs when it represents the application of existing policy. Unfair practice charge failed to demonstrate a unilateral change in policy where the County Board of Supervisors policy regarding mandatory furloughs was clearly established. Erroneous publication of the policy by the County Personnel Department suggesting that certain bargaining units were exempt from the policy was not sufficient to show that the Board of Supervisors had in fact amended the policy to exclude those bargaining units. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 122 | 08/11/10 |
| 2101H | Regents of the University of California (Davis) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Notice of a proposed change must be given to an official of the union who has the authority to act on behalf of the organization. The knowledge of one or even several members of the bargaining unit, who lack authority to act in an official capacity, will not be imputed to the organization. Therefore, notice of a proposed change will not be imputed to a union solely on the basis that the employer notified an employee was a member of the union. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 55 | 03/01/10 |
| 1876Ha | Trustees of the California State University 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Notice of a proposed change in policy must be given sufficiently in advance of a firm decision to make such a change to allow the exclusive representative a reasonable amount of time to make a demand to negotiate. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 73 | 04/15/09 |
| 2115S | State of California (Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Personnel Administration) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain By giving notice more than four months before the planned implementation date, the State afforded the union ample opportunity to negotiate over the effects of the layoff, including the area of layoff. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 99 | 06/10/10 |
| 2110S | State of California (Department of Veterans Affairs) * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2315-M 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by County of Sacramento (2013) PERB Decision No. 2315-M. * * *Layoff notices sent to bargaining unit members did not constitute sufficient notice to the union of the employer’s decision to layoff employees. Request to bargain over layoff decision would have been futile because layoff notices indicated the employer had already made a firm decision. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 90 | 06/01/10 |
| 2112I | Los Angeles Superior Court 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The charge failed to state a prima facie case for unlawful unilateral change, where the alleged changes were outside the scope of representation. Union alleged the employer made changes in practice by eliminating nine regular court interpreter assignments and leaving vacancies in daily as-needed assignments unfilled. The Court Interpreter Act specifically provides that the “delivery of court services” is outside the scope of representation, and the Board has held that an employer’s determination of staff or service levels is not within the scope of representation. A matter outside scope does not become a mandatory subject of bargaining because the parties negotiate over it or even reach an agreement. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 94 | 06/07/10 |
| 2100M | County of Sonoma 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Charging party failed to establish that the terms and conditions of employment implemented post-impasse deviated in any significant way from the proposals presented or discussed during negotiations. Although employer changed some of the contract language in its final implementation, all of the changes were reasonably comprehended within the employer’s pre-impasse proposals. Accordingly, charging party failed to establish a violation of the MMBA. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 54 | 02/25/10 |
| 2104M | County of Mendocino 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain No violation where employer, without giving prior notice to the union, retracted 1% COLA that was implemented by clerical error. Employee classifications that moved to a new bargaining unit were no longer covered by the MOUs of the units they migrated from, and were not entitled to the 1% increase provided for therein. Employer correction of the error, resulting in the cessation of the increase to classifications no longer covered by the MOUs, does not amount to a change in policy where the classifications were not entitled to the increase, and where the employer continued to bargain in good faith over a new MOU covering the new bargaining unit. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 74 | 04/21/10 |
| 2097M | County of Riverside * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M, where the Board held that a request to bargain need not identify specific effects, and also that a union does not need to demand to bargain effects if the employer does not provide reasonable advance notice of its decision. * * *Where a change is made to a matter that is not within the scope of representation, or where the right to demand bargaining over the decision to change has been waived by the employee organization, the employer is obligated to provide notice and an opportunity to bargain over the negotiable effects of the decision, but not the decision itself. Failure by the employee organization to make a valid request to bargain the negotiable effects of the decision constitutes a waiver of the right to bargain regarding those effects. The employee organization’s request must clearly indicate the desire to bargain over the effects as opposed to the decision itself. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 49 | 02/10/10 |
| 2001M | Omnitrans 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The obligation to meet and negotiate in good faith is one that must be fulfilled before implementing changes to matters within the scope of representation. Thus, absent a waiver by the exclusive representative, an employer violates its duty to meet and confer in good faith when it makes a unilateral change prior to the completion of bargaining. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 34 | 01/30/09 |
| 2055M | Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Once an employer gives appropriate notice of a proposed change, it is not required to invite bargaining. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 144 | 08/26/09 |
| 1778E | Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where an exclusive representative has received notice of the decision to eliminate a position, the effects of which it believes to be negotiable, the employer’s failure to give formal notice is of no legal import; pp. 4-5. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 167 | 10/06/05 |
| 1674E | Fresno County Office of Education 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Notice to the union must be made to a union official. Notice after the decision to implement transfers is not prior notice. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 219 | 08/19/04 |
| 1565Ma | Fresno Irrigation District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain On remand from unpublished Court of Appeal decision, Board vacated December 16, 2003 decision in Fresno Irrigation District (2003) PERB Dec. No.1565-M. Court of Appeal found no violation of MMBA when District denied Association use of District facilities for meetings. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 41 | 12/21/04 |
| 1577M | County of Riverside 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain It is the County’s failure to process the grievance, not the merits of the grievance, that constitutes the unlawful conduct more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 45 | 12/31/03 |
| 1652E | Lost Hills Union Elementary School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Statement that “when you drive a bus you get bus pay and when you work as a custodian you get custodian pay, etc” is not clear and unambiguous statement that could be reasonably understood to mean the District was going to discontinue use of the wage formula for non-driving times relative to employees working as bus drivers part of the day and in other job classifications the rest of the day. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 191 | 06/30/04 |
| 1507H | Trustees of the California State University 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The ALJ properly found that, based upon the existing practice of the parties, CSU failed to notify APC of the implementation of the new policies. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 26 | 01/08/03 |
| 1504E | Clovis Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The Board concludes that the District did not provide prior notice to CSEA before the District conducted the election and announced its intent to implement the election results. This conclusion results from CSEA’s role in CBA ratification process as set forth in CSEA Policy 610 and Chapter 250’s constitution, known to both the District and Chapter 250, and the certification of the exclusive representative as CSEA and its Chapter 250, as listed in the CBA. CSEA immediately objected to the election and demanded the right to negotiate upon learning of its happening, contrary to the District’s assertions. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 15 | 12/18/02 |
| 1374S | State of California (Department of Youth Authority) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer's letter requesting union to change designation of facilities to institutions for purpose of steward representation did not put union on notice that employer was going to unilaterally change the designations. Failure to file charge within 6 months of letter is not a waiver. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31059 | 02/28/00 |
| 1296S | State of California (Department of Personnel Admin) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Adopting and publishing regulations changing travel reinbursement rates for excluded employees does not constitute constructive notice of change in past practice for unit members sufficient to start limitations period; p. 17, proposed dec; Employer mentioning during negotiations of proposed changes in excluded employees travel rules did not give notice to union that its members would not have the same changes applied to them under the expired contract clause. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30009 | 10/22/98 |
| 1279S | State of California (Departments of Personnel Administration, et al. * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of San Diego (2020) PERB Decision No. 2721-M * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Napa Valley Community College District (2018) PERB Decision No. 2563 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Notice of a unilateral change at one department of the State does not constitute notice for any other department. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29148 | 08/21/98 |
| 1270E | San Bernardino City Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652. * * *Without prior notice and opportunity to negotiate, a change in policy tips the balance of negotiations, undermining the exclusive representative and forcing it to try to talk the employer back into the previously established policy; p. 53, proposed decision. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29113 | 06/22/98 |
| 1260S | State of California (Department of Forestry and Fire Protection) (California Department of Forestry Firefighters) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain In a unilateral change case, the statute of limitations contained in section 3514.5 begins to run when the charging party has actual or constructive notice of the respondent's clear intent to implement the alleged charge; p. 9, citing The Regents of the University of California (1990) PERB Decision No. 826-H. State's advisory to union that it intended to award new benefits contract, which did not provide union with any information concerning the specific aspects of the new plan or any information concerning the old and new plans, was not actual or constructive notice for purposes of computing the six-month period; p. 10. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29083 | 04/20/98 |
| 1259E | Fall River Joint Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Adequate notice of a new teacher swap program is not clearly established by letters to teachers implementing in the program; p. 28. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29082 | 04/08/98 |
| 1258S | State of California (Board of Equalization) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where employer unconditionally offers to meet with exclusive representative, the employer's cancellation of a meeting and referral to its attorney does not operate as a retraction of its offer. The onus is on the exclusive representative to follow up. Failure to do so means the charging party failed to meet its burden of proof. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29081 | 04/03/98 |
| 1240E | Fremont Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Abandoning contractual rehire procedures without notice or an opportunity to meet and confer is per se refusal to negotiate; p. 7. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29026 | 12/04/97 |
| 1235S | State of California (Board of Equalization) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Notice of a proposed change must be given to an official of the employee organization who has authority to act on behalf of the organization; notice must be communicated in a manner which clearly informs the recipient of the proposed change; and notice must be given sufficiently in advance of a firm decision to make a change to allow the exclusive representative a reasonable amount of time to decide whether to make a demand to negotiate; p. 2, warning letter. Where exclusive representative received several forms of notice from the employer, but did not indicate a desire to bargain until a month after the change was implemented, the exclusive representative failed to make a timely demand to bargain; p. 3; p. 3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29018 | 11/24/97 |
| 1163E | Arcata Elementary School District * * * OVERRULED by Huntington Beach Union High School District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1525 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Huntington Beach Union High School District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1525. * * *No prior notice given to exclusive representative when the employer posted announcement and placed advertisement for new positions before the union learned of the plan; p. 10, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27120 | 06/26/96 |
| 1154E | El Centro School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Once on notice exclusive representative bears burden of clearly communicating request to bargain to the employer. "Not waiving" rights or threatened legal action are insufficient. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27106 | 06/07/96 |
| 1085E | Cajon Valley Union School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Actual knowledge of a change in the hours of vacant positions is not required only constructive knowledge. The district made numerous changes in hours of vacant positions which affected every classification and occurred at almost every job site; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26063 | 03/01/95 |
| 1067S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (Association of California State Attorneys and Administrative Law Judges and Professional Engineers in California Government; California State Employees' Association; California Department of Forestry Employees' Association, Local 2881, International Association of Fire Fighters) 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain The Governor does not fail to meet and confer in good faith through the act of submitting a budget to the Legislature prior to meeting and conferring with State employee unions. The submission of a proposed budget is not a matter for negotiations, but is instead the performance of a constitutionally imposed duty; p. 10, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26010 | 11/09/94 |
| 0952E | Sacramento City Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Charging party failed to demonstrate that the employer refused to bargain over the decision to transfer bargaining unit work nor was it demonstrated that a recent request to bargain would be futile; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23152 | 09/10/92 |
| 0789E | Beverly Hills Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Decision to lay off did not put union on notice of later and separate decision to contract out; pp. 9-10. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21042 | 01/19/90 |
| 0790E | Compton Community College District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain As District's formulation and distribution of schedule did not amount to the adoption of a final work calendar, District complied with its duty to give union notice and opportunity to bargain. When union rejected offer to negotiate, District was free to implement. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21051 | 02/06/90 |
| 0784E | Compton Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain District violated EERA sections 3543.5(b) and (c) when it changed its overtime policy without negotiating with CSEA. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21029 | 12/29/89 |
| 0717E | Klamath-Trinity Joint Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Charging party stated prima facie violation of EERA section 3543.5 by alleging that the district transferred or subcontracted work out of the bargaining unit without first providing the association with notice and an opportunity to bargain about the decision and/or its effects. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20029 | 12/30/88 |
| 0720E | Compton Community College District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer provided reasonable notice and a meaningful opportunity to bargain over the effects of its layoff decision when it notified association of layoffs two and four months prior to implementation. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20057 | 03/01/89 |
| 0715E | Lake Elsinore School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Board dismissed charge alleging that district failed to give notice and the opportunity to bargain the negotiable effects of the district's nonnegotiable decision to reduce of hours of instructional aides. No duty to bargain effects caused by reduction in aide time as main purpose of instructional aides hired under School Improvement Project was the maximization of direct instructional assistance of students. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20027 | 12/29/88 |
| 0640H | Regents of the University of California 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Demand need not be specific or made in a particular form. more or view all topics or full text. | 12 | 19007 | 12/10/87 |
| 0625E | Fountain Valley Elementary School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Providing notice and opportunity to bargain does not create duty to renegotiate contractual term not subject to reopeners. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18115 | 06/23/87 |
| 0606E | Lake Elsinore School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Where the employer repeatedly expresses a willingness to negotiate a tentative calendar there is no unilateral change; p. 14. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18025 | 12/31/86 |
| 0582E | Oak Grove School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Unilateral change found where the employer failed to give notice and opportunity to bargain over change in work time. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17134 | 06/30/86 |
| 0578E | Plumas Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain No duty to bargain before change in financing of health care plan where no impact on unit shown. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17127 | 06/26/86 |
| 0556E | Stanislaus County Department of Education 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Whether demand is adequate is a question of fact to be determined on case-by-case basis; the request need not be specific or made in a particular form; determinative factor is whether desire to bargain is made known. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17039 | 12/31/85 |
| 0557E | Nevada Joint Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain No waiver from failure to request bargaining where decision already made. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17040 | 12/31/85 |
| 2311Ma | City of Escondido * * * VACATED IN PART By City of Escondido v. PERB (Cal.Ct.App., Mar. 8, 2017, No. D070462) 2017 WL 915109 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * REVERSED IN PART by City of Escondido v. PERB (Cal. Ct. App., Mar. 8, 2017, No. D070462) 2017 WL 915109, where the Court of Appeal found that the record did not contain substantial evidence supporting a PERB factual finding. * * *Employer’s decision to layoff full-time code enforcement officers was made prior to or simultaneously with the decision to transfer work outside of the bargaining unit. Under the circumstances presented here, it would have been futile for the union to request bargaining over the transfer. When a firm decision is made prior to an employer providing notice and an opportunity to negotiate a decision made by the employer that is within the scope of representation, the employer cannot defend on the ground that the union failed to request or demand negotiations. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 178 | 05/11/16 |
| 0488E | Pleasant Valley School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain When viewed in context, union's actions viewed as adequate demand to bargain; no obligation to demand bargaining when firm decision already made. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16093 | 02/27/85 |
| 0372E | Kern Community College District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer must negotiate over effects as soon as it decides to lay off, consistent with its duty to negotiate over the effects of a decision at a meaningful time; p. 11. more or view all topics or full text. | 8 | 15016 | 12/29/83 |
| 0373E | Mt. Diablo Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Mt. Diablo Unified School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 373b and OVERRULED IN PART by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * * 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Mt. Diablo Unified School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 373b and OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * *An employer is obligated to provide the exclusive representative with notice and a reasonable opportunity to bargain the effects of the layoff once the employer reaches a firm decision to lay off; pp. 20, 25-27. more or view all topics or full text. | 8 | 15017 | 12/30/83 |
| 0360E | Arcohe Union School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer obliged to give notice and opportunity to bargain subcontracting of custodial services. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14294 | 11/23/83 |
| 0353H | Regents of the University of California 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Nonexclusive representative and employees entitled to notice and opportunity to discuss elimination of pay differential for food workers. Employer's failure to provide either is violation of duty. Employer's good faith no defense to unilateral change complaint. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14280 | 10/27/83 |
| 0337E | Kern Community College District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * * 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * *Employer must give notice and opportunity to bargain effects of lay off; p. 13. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14229 | 08/19/83 |
| 0325E | Long Beach Unified School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Employer who did not initiate transfers--obligated to bargain on demand--but not obligated to give notice to employee organization; p. 4. Charge against receiving District - not transferring employer changes the obligation of employee organization. Employee organization has initial burden of demanding to negotiate on behalf of new employees; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14193 | 07/08/83 |
| 0326E | Oakland Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * * 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855 * * * Employer obligated to give notice and opportunity to bargain on effects of layoff; p. 30. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14195 | 07/11/83 |
| 0300E | Arvin Union School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain District's posting of Board agenda at various school locations does not constitute effective notice to the exclusive representative of proposed changes in scope matters; p. 10. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14119 | 03/30/83 |
| 0225E | Newark Unified School District, Board of Education 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Violation found where District had a negotiating obligation (over effects of layoff) at time it proposed layoff, even though the full extent to which layoff would ultimately be implemented was speculative at that time; p. 5. Because it may reasonably be expected that a layoff of any magnitude will have an effect upon matters within scope, the proposal of layoff itself triggers the employer's obligation to provide notice and an opportunity to negotiate to the exclusive representative; p. 6. more or view all topics or full text. | 6 | 13164 | 06/30/82 |
| 0177E | Anaheim Union High School District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain An employer is not entitled to unilaterally establish a released time policy from which negotiations begin. This would artificially divide a negotiable matter into negotiable and nonnegotiable components. more or view all topics or full text. | 5 | 12148 | 10/28/81 |
| 0919E | Sylvan Union Elementary School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of Santa Clara (2013) PERB Decision No. 2321-M, where the Board held that a union does not need to demand to bargain effects if the employer does not provide reasonable advance notice of the employer’s decision. * * *No prima facie violation of District's duty to bargain effects where Association receives actual notice of decision and fails to make an adequate demand to bargain. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23017 | 01/07/92 |
| 0915E | Compton Community College District 602.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain Ratification of full and complete contract, which failed to include tentative agreement on retirement bonuses, constituted notice to charging parties that district did not ratify the retirement bonus; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23012 | 12/20/91 |