All notes for Subtopic 700.07000 – Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality

DecisionDescriptionPERC Vol.PERC IndexDate
2648M City of Arcadia
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty 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.
06/12/19
I057M City of Fremont
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty 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. more or view all topics or full text.
386810/25/13
2164M West Contra Costa County Healthcare District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
To state a prima facie case of unlawful domination or interference, the charging party must allege facts that demonstrate that the employer’s conduct tends to interfere with the internal activities of an employee organization or tends to influence the choice between employee organizations. The mere fact that lead worker had authority to perform some supervisory duties was insufficient to establish that lead worker had apparent authority to act on behalf of the employer in circulating a petition seeking to restrict union’s access to bargaining unit employees. Employee’s own knowledge and approval of petition is insufficient to impute knowledge and approval of conduct to the employer. more or view all topics or full text.
354502/24/11
1912H Regents of the University of California
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty 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.
3111706/26/07
1663M County of Monterey
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
County violated MMBA by granting registration to a rival employee organization under its local rules where registration carries a presumptive finding that the incumbent employee organization’s representative is inadequate and the incumbent employee organization had no opportunity to participate in the registration process. However, County’s identical actions with respect to peace officers did not violate MMBA since peace officers are entitled by statute to a separate bargaining unit. more or view all topics or full text.
2820407/16/04
1506E Santa Clarita Community College District (College of the Canyons)
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
Employer violates (d) by accreting unrepresented employees into an existing bargaining unit while a different union was organizing the unrepresented employees. more or view all topics or full text.
273501/08/03
1543E Victor Valley Community College District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty 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.
2711107/23/03

700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
Under HEERA sections 3571(d) and 3571.3, the employer is prohibited from granting one union space to place a banner unless other unions also are permitted to use the same space. The fact that competing unions were not interested in using the banner space is not relevant. An employee union is not in any position to negate the clear prescripts of the statute by signing the signing of a release or a waiver. [177 Cal.App.3d at 655-656] A limited number of exceptions where the University, contrary to its own rules, permitted organizations to use official University banner space does not negate the validity of the rule. The University may not permit a union to use the space because the space is official University space and its use by a union could be interpreted as University endorsement of that union contrary to HEERA sections 3571(d) and 3571.3. [177 Cal.App.3d at 656] University endorsement of that union contrary to HEERA sections 3571(d) and 3571.3. [177 Cal.App.3d at 656] more or view all topics or full text.
1278E Long Beach Community College District (California School Employees Association)
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty 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.
222914708/14/98
1270E San Bernardino City Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Contra Costa Community College District (2019) PERB Decision No. 2652
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
EERA section 3543.5(d) makes it unlawful for an employer to "in any way encourage employees to join any organization in preference to another." The test is "whether the employer's conduct tends to influence that choice (between employee organizations) or provide stimulus in one direction or the other"; No violation where the employer tells a union representative to "get the hell out" of a meeting; p. 63, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text.
222911306/22/98
1073E Ventura Community College District (Service Employees International Union Local 535)
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
District violated 3543.5(b) and (d) by providing financial assistance to Classified Senate and openly deferring to CS positions on negotiable topics. However, placement of CS on District Board agenda consistent with intent of AB 1725. Clerical and support was found de minimus. more or view all topics or full text.
192603112/07/94
0833E Los Rios Community College District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
Failure of charging party to allege facts to show district's refusal to carry personal unstamped mail tended to influence employees free choice or provided stimulus in one direction or another to employee organizations is grounds for dismissal of section 3543.5(d) charges; p. 7. more or view all topics or full text.
142116008/10/90
0795E Jamestown Elementary School District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
No violation where no evidence that content of employee meetings at which decertification was discussed was sanctioned or encouraged by employer; no evidence that access afforded to dissident union not afforded to incumbent or that employer otherwise favored dissident group; pp. 19-20, proposed dec. (Writ summarily denied.) more or view all topics or full text.
142106903/20/90
0389E Clovis Unified School District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
By meeting and conferring with Faculty Senate, by providing Faculty Senate with financial assistance and support and by making express statements favoring the Senate, District created impression that it favored Senate Association, thereby unlawfully encouraging employees to support that organization. Fact that Faculty Senate was not listed on ballot is inconsequential; pp. 4-5. more or view all topics or full text.
81511907/02/84
0214E Sacramento City Unified School District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
PERB will find a 3543.5(a) violation when employer's acts tend to result in some harm to employee rights and the employer is unable to justify its actions by proving operational necessity. Negotiation sessions between District and an organization of supervisors, created at District's suggestion, during election campaign of another union seeking to represent supervisors did, in fact, tend to harm protected rights under the Act; p. 7. Operational necessity argument - that District was compelled to meet with supervisors pursuant to EERA section 3543.1(a) - rejected. District met with supervisors exclusively during question concerning representation. Strict neutrality by Employer, required under circumstances, not shown; p. 9. more or view all topics or full text.
61311804/30/82
0159Sb State of California (Department of Transportation) (State Trial Attorneys Association)
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
No favoritism found in State employer's rule restricting employee organization access to mail system. Hearing officer speculation about the disparate effects of the rule on various organizations is no substitute for evidence. more or view all topics or full text.
51206807/07/81
0103E Santa Monica Community College District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
Employer unlawfully encouraged employees to join one organization over another by giving salary increase to members of rival organization; pp. 21-23. more or view all topics or full text.
31012309/21/79
0054E Hartnell Community College District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
District could grant voluntary recognition prior to scheduled unit determination hearing because QCR not raised merely by interest shown by competing organization, where competing organization had not yet filed petition to join hearing. more or view all topics or full text.
2211706/05/78
0038E Azusa Unified School District
700.7000: EMPLOYER DOMINATION OR ASSISTANCE; DOMINATION OF OR ASSISTANCE TO LABOR ORGANIZATIONS; Favoritism; Contract Ban on Distribution or Solicitation; Unequal Treatment of Unions; Preferential Access; Duty of Strict Neutrality
Clearly unlawful to render assistance in such a way as to discriminate against another competing employee organization. Employer's extension of benefits to union in spirit of cooperation which doesn't constitute employer control or influence not illegal. Where more than one union involved employer must be strictly neutral in extending organizational opportunities. more or view all topics or full text.
158711/23/77