All notes for Subtopic 800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1738M | City of San Diego 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case MMBA does not expressly impose a statutory duty of fair representation on employee organizations. In Hussey v. Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3 (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1213, however, the court stated that under the MMBA “unions owe a duty of fair representation to their [unit] members, and this requires them to refrain from representing their [unit] members arbitrarily, discriminatorily, or in bad faith.” Because the Board found that the City and Association negotiated an MOU that discriminated against employees who abstained from participation in the Association, it also found that the Association’s actions in negotiating that MOU were discrimination and in violation of its duty of fair representation. (adopting proposed decision at pp. 11-12.) more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 57 | 01/20/05 |
| 1738M | City of San Diego 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Board found that the Association violated its duty of fair representation by negotiating an MOU that discriminated against non-Association members. (p. 6.) more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 57 | 01/20/05 |
| 2674Mb | Orange County Employees Association (Hamilton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 108 | 05/28/20 |
| 2674Ma | Orange County Employees Association (Hamilton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In duty of fair representation cases, employees are only entitled to an award of back pay or other damages where they can show that the union’s breach was the actual or proximate cause of their injuries. It is incumbent upon the charging party to put evidence of causation into the record during PERB’s hearing process. (p. 4.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 108 | 12/11/19 |
| 2580S | Cal Fire Local 2881 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The law does not impose any obligation to represent employees, unless the exclusive representative possesses the exclusive means by which such member can vindicate an individual right, and the right in question derives from a collective bargaining agreement. (National Education Association-Jurupa (Norman) (2014) PERB Decision No. 2371, pp. 14-15.) A Name-Clearing hearing and State Personnel Board appeal are statutory rather than collectively-bargained for. Therefore, a union owes employees no duty of fair representation in either of these contexts. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 43 | 08/17/18 |
| 2674M | Orange County Employees Association (Hamilton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Though mere negligence or poor judgment in handling a grievance do not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation, a union’s negligence may rise to the level of arbitrary conduct in cases where the individual interest is strong and the union’s failure to perform a ministerial act completely extinguishes the employee’s right to pursue his claim. (p. 8.)When a union’s failure to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing is so extreme that it cannot be relied on to represent the employee further in the proceeding, potential remedies include an order to pay outside counsel to represent the employee or to reimburse the employee’s attorney fees. (pp. 8-9.) Attorney fees, however, may only be awarded when the employee hires private counsel to pursue the claims in the grievance impacted by the union’s unlawful conduct. (p. 10.) Because the employee’s lawsuit against her employer did not encompass the MOU violation alleged in her grievance, attorney fees were not justified as damages for the union’s violation. (p. 11.) more or view all topics or full text. | 44 | 76 | 10/15/19 |
| 2581E | United Teachers Los Angeles (Le Mere) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case PERB rejected a bargaining unit member’s argument that their exclusive representative’s past practice in filing disciplinary appeals on behalf of unit members created a duty to file an appeal in her case. An exclusive representative’s past practice with regard to grievance processing may be relevant to whether the representative breached its duty of fair representation by deviating from that practice in a particular instance. However, the duty of fair representation arises from the collective bargaining contract, not from a past practice itself. (pp. 2-3.) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 44 | 08/21/18 |
| 2581E | United Teachers Los Angeles (Le Mere) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An exclusive representative does not owe a duty of fair representation to a bargaining unit member unless the representative possesses the exclusive means by which such member can vindicate an individual right. Here, the union did not have exclusive control over the disciplinary appeals process because the bargaining contract authorized either the union or the affected employee to file a notice of appeal. (pp. 4-5.) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 44 | 08/21/18 |
| 2575M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Garcia) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging Parties alleged that their exclusive representative had breached its duty of fair representation by: (1) inducing Charging Parties to continue working misclassified overtime hours with false assurances that they would be fully compensated for all overtime hours worked if the organization prevailed in its grievance against the employer; (2) urging an arbitrator to award all employees an equal lump sum payment to remedy the grievance and capping the employer’s total liability, rather than awarding full back pay only to those employees who actually worked the misclassified hours; and, (3) failing to provide notice and opportunity for input and/or misleading Charging Parties regarding the status of settlement negotiations and the terms of an arbitrator’s opinion and award, despite requests by Charging Parties for such information. The Office of the General Counsel dismissed the charge for lack of jurisdiction over the arbitrator, lack of ripeness for review, and/or failure to state a prima facie case of an unfair practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 22 | 06/28/18 |
| 2575M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Garcia) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Board denied an appeal and adopted the dismissal of an unfair practice charging alleging a breach of the duty of fair representation arising from damages allegedly suffered as the result of an arbitrator’s opinion and award in a grievance brought by the exclusive representative on Charging Parties’ behalf. An arbitrator is not a proper respondent in an unfair practice and therefore PERB had no authority to review the arbitrator’s opinion and award to determine if its provisions constituted an unfair labor practice. Additionally, the facts, as alleged in the charge, demonstrated that Charging Parties had notice and opportunity to give their input before their representative entered into a tentative agreement to settle the dispute and that, because the tentative settlement agreement was never finalized, any harm suffered by Charging Parties was not attributable to the representative’s acts or omissions. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 22 | 06/28/18 |
| 2462C | Service Employees International Union, Local 721 (Oliver) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Because the duty of fair representation is the quid pro quo for the exclusive representative’s right to employees, the absence of a duty of fair representation language in the Trial Court Act does not indicate legislative intent to deprive PERB of jurisdiction to consider duty of fair representation cases brought by Trial Court employees. Misspellings or minor, non-prejudicial errors in a person’s title or job duties were not grounds for reversing dismissal of employee’s unfair practice charge alleging that her representative had violated its duty of fair representation. Amended charge, which alleged that arbitration procedure was contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between her representative and the Trial Court employer and that the matters raised in her charge overlapped with issues of a grievance that was subject to the arbitration procedure, was sufficient to demonstrate that the arbitration proceedings were part of a collectively-bargained grievance procedure to which the duty of fair representation attached rather than extra-contractual proceedings for which no such duty attaches. Board declined to adopt that portion of the dismissal letter concluding that the charge was deficient because it did not include a copy of the applicable MOU or allege facts showing that an arbitration hearing was pursued through a negotiated appeal process contained in the MOU. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 89 | 11/24/15 |
| 2475E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Raines, et al) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The representative has broad discretion to negotiate and modify collectively-bargained terms and conditions of employment but exclusively-represented employees are entitled to notice and some opportunity for input before the representative modifies collectively-bargained rights, so that employees may act to protect their interests.) PERB does not require a contract ratification vote or prescribe the particular form of access for employees to communicate their views but the exclusive representative violates the duty of fair representation where it provides no notice of a modification of the collective bargaining agreement and conceals from employees a side letter that substantially affects employee seniority rights. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 147 | 02/29/16 |
| 2371E | National Education Association-Jurupa (Norman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An exclusive representative owes no duty of fair representation to a unit member unless the exclusive representative possesses the exclusive means by which such member can vindicate an individual right, and the right in question derives from a CBA. Permanent teacher dismissal proceedings are governed exclusively by the Education Code, and are beyond the scope of negotiations under EERA. Therefore, it was legally impossible for permanent teacher dismissal proceedings to be a term and condition contained in a CBA between the District and NEA-J, and NEA-J owed no duty of fair representation for the statutory teacher dismissal procedure. The CTA is not the exclusive representative for certificated bargaining units, and therefore owes no duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 156 | 04/18/14 |
| 2283E | Jurupa Unified School District 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An employee organization’s duty of fair representation runs to the employee, and is enforced by a charge against the employee organization, not against the employer. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 58 | 08/21/12 |
| 2261M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Sahle) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The preponderance of the evidence fails to support allegations that the union violated its duty of fair representation where it responded to its bargaining unit member’s inquiries and did not provide documents which it did not have or which did not exist. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 175 | 05/08/12 |
| 2226C | Operating Engineers Local 3 (Williams) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Under the Trial Court Act section 71637.1, a trial court may adopt reasonable rules and regulations providing for the designation of management and confidential employees; under section 71639.1, subdivision (e), a management employee so designated is not entitled to file an unfair practice charge; where charge alleged that charging party’s position as Court Supervisor was within a bargaining unit of specified management employees at the trial court and failed to establish that Court Supervisor position was not designated by the trial court as a management employee, charging party lacked standing to bring the charge and PERB was without authority to process the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 93 | 12/09/11 |
| 2297M | Inlandboatmans Union of the Pacific 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Fact that attorney represented union in instant proceeding concerning allegations of violation of duty of fair representation has no bearing on whether union previously violated duty of fair representation in its handling of grievance. Fact that union chose to provide another representative to handle employee’s dispute does not establish violation of duty of fair representation. Given the wide latitude accorded a union in the representation of its members, the evidence presented did not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation with respect to handling of grievance over placement of employee on non-dispatch list. Union participated actively in attempting to resolve the dispute between employee and employer. While employee may have disagreed with union’s strategy in attempting to obtain a mediated reinstatement, evidence failed to establish that union’s conduct was “without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment.” Union’s decision to withdraw representation based upon its belief that employee’s conduct made further success unlikely had a rational basis and there is no evidence that it was otherwise arbitrary or based on invidious discrimination. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 135 | 12/12/12 |
| 2215M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Warren) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish prima facie violation of duty of fair representation based upon a failure to file a grievance on behalf of a member; charge failed to allege facts showing decision not to file grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or lacking in good faith, or that it was without a rational basis and devoid of honest judgment, where union considered concerns raised by charging party and made a reasoned judgment that the concerns were not grievable. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 77 | 11/09/11 |
| 2204M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Horan) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Where substance of allegation was that union “failed to represent me at an arbitration hearing,” charging party failed to state sufficient facts, which if proven, would constitute a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, thereby warranting dismissal of the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 50 | 09/23/11 |
| 2198M | Alameda County Management Employees Association (Harper) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An unrepresented employee seeking inclusion in the bargaining unit lacked standing to bring a duty of fair representation charge; the duty of fair representation extends only to bargaining unit employees. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 38 | 08/29/11 |
| 2286S | American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 2620 (McGuire) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No breach of duty of fair representation based upon union’s voluntary representation at Skelly hearing and State Personnel Board settlement conference and handling of grievances. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 75 | 09/24/12 |
| 2191S | Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (Gutierrez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish that union’s actions in sending three “uniformed” representatives to meetings regarding adverse action, refusing to pursue appeal of adverse action, and proposing settlement requiring waiver of future legal rights against the state abused its discretion were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 16 | 07/19/11 |
| 2247M | Service Employees International Union United Long Term Care Workers (Smith) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to demonstrate how alleged failure to pursue a grievance based upon charging party’s belief that she was improperly paid was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith; union has the discretion whether or not to pursue a grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 151 | 04/06/12 |
| 2264E | Los Angeles County Education Association (Sanders) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish prima facie violation of duty of fair representation based upon failure to take grievance to arbitration, where allegations of charge established that union assigned at least three representatives, including an attorney, to assist employee in resolving her dispute with her employer and repeatedly informed her that employer’s decision to reassign her likely did not constitute a basis for filing a grievance. Charge failed to allege facts showing decision not to file grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory, or lacking in good faith, or that it was without a rational basis and devoid of honest judgment. In addition, charge fails to allege facts showing union’s failure to file grievance foreclosed employee from pursuing a remedy herself. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 184 | 05/21/12 |
| 2240E | California School Employees Association (Erwin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Claim that union’s representation of another bargaining unit member adversely affected charging party did not establish prima facie violation of duty of fair representation. Duty of fair representation does not mean an employee organization is barred from making an agreement which may have an unfavorable effect on some members. Even if union negotiated an agreement that had an adverse effect on charging party, charge failed to demonstrate how union acted in a manner that was "without a rational basis or devoid of rational judgment," and thus breached its statutory duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 127 | 02/24/12 |
| 2224E | California School Employees Association (Milner) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to provide sufficient facts to show how handling of grievance over lunch breaks was arbitrary or in bad faith, where union successfully resolved dispute; charge failed to provide sufficient facts to show charging party requested assistance from union over alleged unjustified writeup; union generally does not have a duty to pursue a union member’s race-based civil rights claims unless the collective bargaining agreement contains a non-discrimination clause or if the agreement itself is discriminatory; charge failed to establish duty of union to pursue discrimination claims. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 91 | 11/30/11 |
| 2225M | Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (Joshua) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to state prima facie violation of duty of fair representation for failure to file a grievance, where it was not clear whether charge alleged failure to file grievance under an applicable collective bargaining agreement or a complaint in another forum. Duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. Union does not have a duty to represent an employee with respect to extra-contractual proceedings that are not within the scope of a collective bargaining agreement. In the absence of evidence that the exclusive representative’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant, “a breach of the duty of fair representation is not stated merely because an exclusive representative declines to proceed or negligently forgets to file a timely appeal of a grievance.” more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 92 | 11/30/11 |
| 2133E | United Faculty of Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District (Tarvin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation is limited to contractually-based remedies under the union’s exclusive control and does not extend to extra-contractual proceedings before agencies such as the Department of Fair Employment and Housing or the State Personnel Board. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 140 | 09/21/10 |
| 2208E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 724 (Davis) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The mere fact that union attempted to resolve employee’s concerns through an informal process rather than through the formal grievance process does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Replacement of one mediation representative with another does not establish violation of duty of fair representation, as selection of representative is an internal union activity not subject to PERB review. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 61 | 10/06/11 |
| 2186M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Chow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation based upon union’s alleged failure to adequately assist charging party in resolving what she perceived as a hostile work environment in her employment. While the duty of fair representation extends to grievance handling by the exclusive representative a reasonable decision not to pursue a grievance, regardless of the merits of the grievance, is not a violation of the duty of fair representation. In order for PERB to find a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charge must include facts demonstrating that the union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Charge fails to set forth facts demonstrating that union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary or in bad faith, that it abused its discretion or that its actions were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Merely alleging that the union failed to return every phone call is insufficient to establish an overall pattern of conduct. As such, the charge fails to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 7 | 06/15/11 |
| 2194E | American Federation of Teachers Part-Time Faculty United, Local 6286 (Peavy) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must show that the respondent’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Union’s failure to pursue grievance did not foreclose employee’s right to a remedy or completely extinguish his right to pursue his claim. Failure of union to present employee’s counter-offer to the employer does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Charge failed to establish that union’s decision not to take grievance to arbitration was arbitrary or lacking in good faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 28 | 08/12/11 |
| 2182M | California Nurses Association (Rosa) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed state prima facie case of breach of the duty of fair representation. Charge failed to establish that union’s failure to file a grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith, or that its conduct extinguished employee’s right to pursue any claim against the employer, or that union’s actions were “without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 86 | 05/26/11 |
| 2169M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Crandell) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish a prima facie case of a breach of the duty of fair representation because it did not allege facts showing that the union ignored the charging party’s grievance or that it had a duty to represent him before the civil service commission. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 50 | 02/25/11 |
| 2168M | Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West Local 2005 (Hayes) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An exclusive representative does not breach the duty of fair representation by failing/refusing to provide an employee with a union representative of his/her choice. Accordingly, exclusive representative’s decision to assign a particular representative and prohibit charging party from speaking with other stewards about his grievances does not breach the duty of fair representation. In addition, representative’s alleged failure to respond to all of charging party’s grievance status inquiries and failure to notify charging party of representative’s separation do not amount to more than mere negligence, where charge failed to establish that such negligence completely extinguished his right to pursue his grievances against his employer. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 48 | 02/25/11 |
| 2146M | International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1245 (Gallardo) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The union has the discretion whether or not to pursue a grievance. Refusal to pursue a grievance the union believes is unmeritorious is not a violation, as long as the refusal is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. It is the charging party’s burden to allege facts which demonstrate that the refusal was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Where charging party failed to do so the charge failed to establish a prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 9 | 12/07/10 |
| 2149E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Strygin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An exclusive representative’s failure to return an employee’s correspondence and delay in filing a grievance on the employee’s behalf, does not, without more, establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. A prima facie case must allege facts showing that the union’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. At a minimum the unfair practice charge must allege facts showing the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Where charging party failed to do so the charge failed to establish a prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation. Mere negligence does not amount to a breach of the duty of fair representation unless the exclusive representative’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for charging party. Here, the exclusive representative’s failure to respond to inquiries from charging party and delay in filing a grievance were at most “mere negligence.” Where there is no evidence that charging party was foreclosed from any remedy, the charge failed to establish a prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 12 | 12/13/10 |
| 2150E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Thomas) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Unfair practice charge was untimely filed. However, even if timely filed, the charge failed to establish a prima facie case. The union has the discretion whether or not to pursue a grievance. Refusal to pursue a grievance the union believes is unmeritorious is not a violation, as long as the refusal is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. It is the charging party’s burden to allege facts which demonstrate that the refusal was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Where charging party failed to do so the charge failed to establish a prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 13 | 12/13/10 |
| 2127E | Mount Diablo Education Association (Scott) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not breach its duty of fair representation under “pattern of conduct” theory. Despite its failure to provide employee with grievance responses, appeal one grievance within contractual time limits and appeal another grievance at all, the union’s overall pattern of conduct was one of assistance to the employee. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 125 | 08/17/10 |
| 2128E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 168 (Gibson) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In general, unions enjoy wide latitude in contract negotiations. Consequently, a union is not required to satisfy all union members, is not barred from making an agreement that has an unfavorable effect on some union members, and is not obligated to bargain an item that will benefit certain unit members only. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 126 | 08/25/10 |
| 2080M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Schmidt) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation under the MMBA, a charging party must, at a minimum, include an assertion of facts from which it becomes apparent in what manner the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. The burden is on the charging party to show how an exclusive representative abused its discretion, and not on the exclusive representative to show how it properly exercised its discretion. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 12 | 11/24/09 |
| 2080M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Schmidt) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case When a charge alleges that an exclusive representative breached its duty of fair representation by failing to act on behalf of an employee, PERB looks to whether the cumulative actions of the exclusive representative, considered in their totality, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of an arbitrary failure to fairly represent the employee. Thus, prima facie case may be established based on an overall pattern of conduct, even if any one action by the exclusive representative, standing alone, would not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 12 | 11/24/09 |
| 2077M | International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees, Local 21, AFL-CIO (Maxey) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation under the MMBA, the charging party must allege facts demonstrating that the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. In analyzing whether an honest judgment has been made, PERB does not decide whether the union’s assessment was correct, but only whether its judgment had a rational basis and was not reached for reasons that were arbitrary or based upon invidious discrimination. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 184 | 11/04/09 |
| 2079M | IBEW Local 1245 (Flowers) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Unions owe a duty of fair representation to their members, and this requires them to refrain from representing their members arbitrarily, discriminatorily, or in bad faith. The duty of fair representation, however, is generally not breached by mere negligence. Rather, absent a showing of arbitrary exercise of power, a union is accorded wide latitude in the representation of its members. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 9 | 11/24/09 |
| 2079M | IBEW Local 1245 (Flowers) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation under the MMBA, a charging party must at a minimum include an assertion of facts from which it becomes apparent in what manner the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 9 | 11/24/09 |
| 2116H | California Faculty Association (Williams) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Unfair practice charge against union for failure to allow non-members to cast a vote to determine support for a proposed two-day-a-month furlough program was dismissed. A union may exclude non-members from voting as long as the union provides the employees some opportunity to communicate their views. PERB will not interfere with matters of internal union affairs where there was no showing of a substantial impact on the employer-employee relationship so as to give rise to the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 101 | 06/14/10 |
| 2117H | California Faculty Association (Halcoussis) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Unfair practice charge against union for failure to allow non-members to cast a vote to determine support for a proposed two-day-a-month furlough program was dismissed. A union may exclude non-members from voting as long as the union provides the employees some opportunity to communicate their views. PERB will not interfere with matters of internal union affairs where there was no showing of a substantial impact on the employer-employee relationship so as to give rise to the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 100 | 06/14/10 |
| 2087E | Santa Ana Educators Association (O'Neil, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie breach of the duty of fair representation by misrepresentation of facts to secure contract ratification, the charging party must show that: (1) the exclusive representative made an untrue assertion of fact (or conduct equivalent to an untrue assertion of fact); (2) the exclusive representative’s assertion was made with knowledge of its falsity; (3) the exclusive representative’s assertion was made to secure ratification of a contract; and (4) the fact misrepresented must have a substantial impact on the relationships of the unit members to their employer. However, “[a] breach of the duty will not be found where the exclusive representative is guilty of ‘mere negligence or poor judgment’.” more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 31 | 12/30/09 |
| 2095H | Coalition of University Employees (Hall) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish prima facie case of breach of duty of fair representation because it alleged no facts showing that employee organization’s opposition to reclassification of charging party’s position out of the bargaining unit was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Employee organization has a legitimate interest in ensuring bargaining unit work is not removed from unit. Employee organization communicated its reasons for opposing the reclassification to charging party on several occasions. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 43 | 02/04/10 |
| 2076M | Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (Lam) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to state prima facie case of breach of duty of fair representation because it alleged no facts showing that employee organization’s participation in closure of employee’s grievances was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Employee organization’s failure to notify employee directly of the closure did not breach duty of fair representation because charge did not establish that employee could have pursued his grievances further without union approval. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 185 | 11/04/09 |
| 1956M | Service Employees International Union Local 1292 (Marriott, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To state a prima facie case alleging that the consolidation of local unions violates the duty of fair representation, the employee must allege facts showing that the consolidation had a substantial impact on the employee’s relationship with her employer. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 78 | 05/09/08 |
| 1964E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (DePace) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Absent bad faith, discrimination, or arbitrary conduct, mere negligence or poor judgment in handling a grievance does not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation by a union. Thus, the denial of a member’s request to file a grievance, without more, does not constitute a breach of the union’s duty of fair representation to the member. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 102 | 06/18/08 |
| 2060S | Service Employees International Union Local 1000 (Duinugala) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish that the delay in processing an employee’s request for arbitration of his grievance or the union’s ultimate decision not to proceed with arbitration of the grievance violated the union’s duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 150 | 09/08/09 |
| 2047E | California Teachers Association (Bussman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Where CTA is not the designated exclusive representative, EERA does not impose a duty of fair representation on CTA. Therefore, a charge specifically against CTA for failure to provide charging party with representation, is not a violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 125 | 06/30/09 |
| 2046E | Alvord Educator's Association (Bussman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case for violation of the duty of fair representation the Charging Party must allege facts showing that the union’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Where Charging Party complained that he communicated to union officials regarding an alleged improper assignment change, “to no avail,” but failed to allege any additional facts to demonstrate that the union abused its discretion or that its actions were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment, the Charging Party failed to set forth a prima facie case for violation of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 128 | 06/30/09 |
| 2050M | Service Employees International Union Local 721 (Hagans and Toole) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In a charge alleging violation of the duty of fair representation and bad faith negotiation under the MMBA, the limitations period begins to run once the charging party knows, or should have known, of the conduct underlying the charge. Charge failed to contain any allegations of unlawful activity within six months prior to filing the charge and was therefore untimely. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 131 | 07/20/09 |
| 2051M | Service Employees International Union Local 721 (Hagens and Toole) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In a charge alleging violation of the duty of fair representation and bad faith negotiation under the MMBA, the limitations period begins to run once the charging party knows, or should have known, of the conduct underlying the charge. Charge failed to contain any allegations of unlawful activity within six months prior to filing the charge and was therefore untimely. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 132 | 07/20/09 |
| 2029E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 410 (Payne) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not breach duty of fair representation by failing to file a grievance over an employee performing work outside her classification, where Union’s decision was not arbitrary, discriminatory, or made in bad faith. Union negotiated the creation of a new classification for the employee with a higher salary and retroactive pay. Union may have reasonably believed that a grievance would have been unsuccessful and that negotiating would achieve a more favorable result. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 90 | 05/27/09 |
| 2028E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 379 (Dunn) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To establish a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charging party must show that the recognized employee organization engaged in conduct that was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith, or that the employee organization’s negligence extinguished the employee’s right to pursue his or her grievance. Union did not breach its duty of fair representation by withdrawing an employee’s grievance one week before a scheduled arbitration hearing because the decision to withdraw was based on newly discovered documents that indicated the grievance lacked merit and the union’s interpretation of those documents was not unreasonable under the circumstances. While the union’s late discovery of the documents may have been negligent, the union’s conduct did not breach the duty of fair representation because under the collective bargaining agreement the employee could arbitrate his grievance without the union’s participation. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 89 | 05/27/09 |
| 2008E | Santa Ana Educators Association (Felicijan and Hetman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Certified exclusive representative owed a duty of fair representation to charging parties who were on a 39-month reemployment list pursuant to Education Code section 44978.1 because charging parties remained “employees” as defined in EERA section 3540.1(j) throughout the 39-month period. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 53 | 03/10/09 |
| 2012E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Adams) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case for violation of the duty of fair representation the charging party must allege facts showing that the union’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Here charging party complained that the union delayed action, and failed to adequately pursue various grievances. However, where at least one reason for delay in scheduling meetings was because of Charging Party’s unavailability, no facts were alleged demonstrating a foreclosure of the employee’s ability to obtain a remedy, and no facts were alleged showing that the union’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith, the Charging Party failed to set forth a prima facie case for violation of the duty of fair representation. The union has the discretion whether or not to pursue a grievance. Refusal to pursue an untimely grievance or a grievance the union believes is unmeritorious is not a violation, as long as the refusal is not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. It is the Charging Party’s burden to allege facts which demonstrate that the refusal was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Where Charging Party failed to do so the charge failed to establish a prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation. The union’s refusal to grant Charging Party’s request for a representative other than the one assigned by the union is not a violation. The duty of fair representation does not obligate a union to provide an employee with the representative of his or her choice. The decision assigning a representative is an internal union matter and is not subject to the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 56 | 03/13/09 |
| 2003E | Glendale Guild/American Federation of Teachers Local 2276 (Waszak) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not breach its duty of fair representation by failing to file a grievance over a teacher’s late performance evaluation when the union’s executive committee discussed the potential grievance and decided against pursuing it. Union did not breach its duty of fair representation when union official encouraged individual to apply for a full-time position and the individual was selected for that position over charging party. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 35 | 01/30/09 |
| 1998M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Estival) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The charge lacked evidence that the union acted arbitrarily, discriminatorily or in bad faith when it failed to challenge charging party’s termination. The fact that charging party filed a complaint with the Department of Labor, which was resolved in his favor six months before his termination, did not, without more, establish that he was terminated in retaliation for protected activity. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 29 | 01/14/09 |
| 1991E | Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Arteaga) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge failed to allege prima facie case of breach of duty of fair representation because union’s negligent act of failing to file a grievance over charging party’s termination did not extinguish charging party’s right under collective bargaining agreement to file a grievance on his own behalf. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 19 | 12/09/08 |
| 1982E | Service Employees International Union, Local 221 (Meredith) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To establish a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charging party must show that the recognized employee organization engaged in conduct that was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. A prima facie case of arbitrary failure to represent an employee may be established based on an overall pattern of conduct even if any one of the employee organization’s actions by itself would not constitute a violation. Union failed to provide probationary employee with requested representation in a meeting where the employee received a poor performance evaluation. Later that morning, a union representative attended a meeting in which the employee was rejected on probation. However, during the meeting the principal told the employee that the representative was not there to represent him but to represent the employee’s subordinates, who had filed grievances against him. When the employee met with a different representative about challenging his rejection on probation, the chapter president argued with the representative and then told him to make the meeting “fast.” Union assigned another representative to employee’s case but after one meeting the representative did not return the employee’s phone calls. This conduct, taken as a whole, was sufficient to demonstrate that the union arbitrarily failed to represent the employee and therefore the charge stated a prima facie breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 157 | 10/24/08 |
| 1984S | Service Employees International Union Local 1000 (George) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Allegations that a union breached its duty of fair representation by asserting that union representatives were dishonest, their statements lacked a rational basis, and their conduct constitutes more than mere negligence, are legal conclusions that do not demonstrate a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 2 | 10/31/08 |
| 1940M | Stationary Engineers Local 39 (Fisher) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In cases alleging a breach of the duty of fair representation, the six-month statutory limitations period begins to run on the date when the charging party, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party knew or should have known more than two months outside the statutory limitations period that further assistance from the Association was unlikely. Accordingly, the charge was untimely filed. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 36 | 01/18/08 |
| 1933H | California Faculty Association (Chapman and Druzgalski) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging Parties did not allege facts that the Association’s decision declining to arbitrate a grievance demonstrated bad faith, discrimination or arbitrary conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 15 | 12/21/07 |
| 1918S | Union of American Physicians and Dentists (Menaster) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union stewards made a rational determination that the Department's concerns regarding an employee’s productivity were a peripheral issue only brought to the forefront by the Department's other concerns with his behavior. The charge does not demonstrate that the Union's failure to file a grievance and advice to concentrate on correcting those issues which it believed were more likely to affect the employee's probationary report were devoid of honest judgment. An employee’s allegation that the Union violated its duty of fair representation by not filing a grievance against the Department when it denied him union representation during an investigatory meeting is dismissed. The charge does not demonstrate that the collective bargaining agreement includes a provision regarding the right to union representation in investigatory meetings and therefore does not demonstrate that filing a grievance regarding this issue was even possible. A Department received recurrent complaints about an employee and the charge reflects the Department provided the employee with consistent justifications for its actions including specific examples of the types of behaviors that were at issue. Therefore, the charge does not demonstrate that a union steward’s advice to resign rather than face termination was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. An employee’s allegations that his union failed to represent him in his hearing before the EDD is dismissed as the duty of fair representation does not attach to an exclusive representative in extra-contractual proceedings before agencies such as the Employment Development Department. An employee’s allegations that his union failed to help him obtain a reasonable accommodation under the ADA is dismissed as the union does not owe a duty of fair representation to him in a forum over which the union does not exclusively control the means to a particular remedy. The charge alleges the union failed to help an employee when the Department ignored his request to be rehired. As the employee chose to resign, it does not appear that the union's duty of fair representation extended to include his post-resignation requests for representation. Even if the duty extended to include this post-resignation request, the application process for state employment is extra-contractual in nature. As such, the allegation is dismissed. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 135 | 08/09/07 |
| 1919M | Inlandboatmans Union of the Pacific (Treas) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging Party contends the Union violated its duty of fair representation by failing to secure his sick leave and lunch time pay, but fails to provide any facts regarding his contact with the union. The charge is devoid of any facts regarding when the Charging Party contacted the Union about this problem, whom he spoke with and what their response was. Without such information, it is impossible for PERB to determine if a violation has occurred. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 138 | 08/10/07 |
| 1914S | Service Employees International Union Local 1000, California State Employees Association (Burnett) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case A disagreement between the grievant and the union as to whether a grievance should proceed to arbitration does not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. Although the employee expressed great frustration with the union's failure to notify him about his arbitration request, the facts do not demonstrate that such conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. The employee’s allegations do not show that the union engaged in arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith conduct in processing the employee’s arbitration request. Under the Dills Act an exclusive representative has the exclusive right to represent employees before the employer in matters involving contract negotiations, administration of the contract and grievance handling. Since the union has the exclusive authority to deal with the employer over these matters, the Dills Act imposes upon the exclusive representative a duty to fairly represent all bargaining unit members in these areas. An exclusive representative does not owe a duty of fair representation to unit members in a forum over which the union does not exclusively control the means to a particular remedy. Since PERB is a forum outside the contract, the union does not owe members a duty of fair representation in proceedings involving PERB. Thus, the union’s refusal to file an unfair practice charge with PERB on an employee’s behalf does not violate the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 118 | 06/26/07 |
| 1898M | Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1704 (Buck) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Under the MMBA, unions owe a duty of fair representation to their members. A union breaches that duty when its conduct toward its members is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. The duty of fair representation is limited to negotiations and contractually based remedies under the union’s exclusive control. In general, the duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. When an MOU preserves the right of a union to both participate in the grievance proceedings and control all requests for grievance arbitration, the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a contractually based remedy. Accordingly, in such cases, the duty of fair representation attaches. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 88 | 04/10/07 |
| 1899E | Service Employees International Union Local 99 (Gutierrez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Employee’s charge that her union failed to meet its duty of fair representation is denied as untimely. An employee’s allegations that her union does not attend to grievances and fails to retain strong representatives are legal conclusions and fail to meet the charging party’s obligation under PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) to provide a clear and concise statement of the facts. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 90 | 04/16/07 |
| 1903E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 374 (Wyman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case An employee did not allege sufficient facts to demonstrate that her grievance was denied due to untimeliness. Further, she alleged no facts demonstrating how her union’s conduct was willful, wanton, done in bad faith or arbitrary, but merely state such as a conclusion. An employee’s charge is dismissed, as she offered no factual support for her allegation that her union would have filed a timely grievance were it not for her physical handicap. A union’s failure to follow exactly the requirements of the grievance process outlined in the collective bargaining agreement does not, without more, demonstrate conduct that can be considered discriminatory, arbitrary, or in bad faith. A union's failure to obtain a member's approval prior to settlement of a grievance does not constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation because that factor alone does not amount to arbitrary conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 94 | 05/07/07 |
| 1897E | United Educators of San Francisco (Gillead) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case For the purposes of establishing a violation of the duty of fair representation, a charging party must show that the union’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. It is not a violation for a union to consolidate charging party’s grievance with a class action grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 87 | 04/10/07 |
| 1885E | Kern High Faculty Association, CTA/NEA (Maaskant) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Board will not interfere in the internal affairs of a union unless they have a substantial impact on the relationships of unit members to their employers so as to give rise to a duty of fair representation, or involve retaliations for protected activity. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 63 | 02/14/07 |
| 1888E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Okereke) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation under EERA, charging party must show that the respondent’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 70 | 02/27/07 |
| 1882E | Service Employees International Union Local 99 (Jones) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation imposed on an exclusive representative extends to grievance handling. In order to state a prima facie case for the breach of this duty, the charging party must demonstrate the exclusive representative’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. In order to state a prima facie case of arbitrary conduct violating the duty of fair representation, a charging party must, at a minimum, include an assertion of sufficient facts from which it becomes apparent how or in what manner the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Although “mere negligence” does not typically constitute a breach of the duty of fair representation, it may support such a finding if the individual interest at stake is strong and the union’s failure to perform a ministerial act completely extinguishes the employee’s right to pursue his claim. more or view all topics or full text. | 01/25/07 | ||
| 1857M | IBEW Local 1245 (Tacke) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Totality of the circumstances did not provide sufficient evidence that the Union selectively informed only union members of the election or otherwise interfered with unit members learning about the election or that employees were unable to reach the polling locations during voting hours. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 2 | 09/01/06 |
| 1858E | California School Employees Association and Its Chapter 198 (Bruce) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case A prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation must allege that the Respondent's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. No violation where the charging party stated only that the Association withheld evidence that could have assisted her in retaining her position. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 3 | 09/07/06 |
| 1892M | Service Employees International Union Local 790 (Chan) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Allegations regarding the union’s failure to return telephone calls regarding the request for arbitration are not sufficient evidence that the union acted in a manner that was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith, where the unfair practice charge did not allege the date(s) on which the charging party made such telephone call(s) to the union. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 75 | 03/15/07 |
| 1850E | California Teachers Association and Oakland Education Association (Welch) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case California Teachers Association, a statewide organization is not the exclusive representative and does not owe employees a duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 152 | 08/17/06 |
| 1867H | State Employees Trades Council-United (Chemello) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The union did not owe charging party a duty of fair representation after he was laid off. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 25 | 12/14/06 |
| 1846S | Union of American Physicians and Dentists (Meenakshi, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation does not require an exclusive representative to satisfy all members of the unit it represents. The union’s refusal to adopt a bargaining stance that could result in greater gains for a particular classification does not establish that the union breached its duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 130 | 05/24/06 |
| 1763E | California Teachers Association (Radford) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must show that the respondent’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. A charging party must, at a minimum, include an assertion of sufficient facts from which it becomes apparent how or in what manner the exclusive representative’s action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 123 | 04/21/05 |
| 1834E | Kern High Faculty Association, CTA/NEA (Maaskant) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case For the purposes of establishing a violation of the duty of fair representation, a charging party must show that the union’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. It is not a violation for a union to withhold information as long as there are notice and an opportunity to be heard before a collective bargaining agreement becomes final. A union violates its duty if it excludes non-members from voting only if the non-members are left completely uninformed about the status of negotiations or if they are not provided an opportunity to express their viewpoints. (Fontana Teachers Association (1984) PERB Decision No. 416.) A union may exclude non-members from voting as long as the union provides them with an opportunity to communicate their views. (El Centro Elementary Teachers Association (1982) PERB Decision No. 232. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 107 | 04/10/06 |
| 1774M | Service Employees International Union Local 790 (Paez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No breach of union’s Duty of Fair Representation by failing to call certain witnesses at the arbitration or failing to represent charging party at his Civil Service hearing. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 150 | 08/10/05 |
| 1781E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Chambers) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union conduct not arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith where union exercised discretion in not pursuing grievance to arbitration after providing charging party the opportunity to appeal the initial decision to the Grievance Review Committee or when it tolled the grievance timelines. Additionally, union did not act in an arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith manner where union abided by the language in the collective bargaining agreement specifically excluding charging party from the unit and filing a grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 6 | 10/27/05 |
| 1780M | Public Employees Union Local 1 (Coleman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No breach of union’s Duty of Fair Representation where grievance was pursued for over two years and settlement benefited classification as a whole. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 170 | 10/11/05 |
| 1764E | United Educators of San Francisco (Banos) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union conduct not arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith where two union representatives and union president meet with and/or speak with charging party several times regarding case. Union may exercise its discretion on how far to pursue a grievance so long as it does not arbitrarily ignore a meritorious grievance. Obtaining an attorney does not automatically terminate a union’s duty to fairly represent member of unit. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 124 | 04/21/05 |
| 1749S | California State Employees Association (Chen) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation is limited to contractually-based remedies under the union’s exclusive control. The charge does not contain facts showing that a request for reasonable accommodation for a disability is an issue covered by the collective bargaining agreement. Instead the reasonable accommodation request form indicates compliance with the Fair Employment and Housing Act. Even if the duty of fair representation was applicable to this matter, Chen did not show that CSEA’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 74 | 02/07/05 |
| 1750S | California State Employees Association (Chen) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Board found that CSEA’s conduct was not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Chen filed paperwork in Sacramento union office rather than with the local steward. Union contacted Chen to explain proper procedure and continued to communicate with her. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 75 | 02/07/05 |
| 1736S | California State Employees Association (Chen) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In a duty of fair representation case, the statute of limitations begins to run when the charging party knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Chen should have known well before February 10, 6 months before the charge was filed, that CSEA was not pursuing her grievance. CSEA drafted the grievance on December 9. CSEA failed to respond to her December 12 letter inquiry and telephone messages the week of January 12. Therefore, the charge was untimely filed. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 56 | 01/19/05 |
| 1693M | Service Employees International Union, Local 250 (Hessong) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Although Local 250 took over two years to process, this did not preclude the grievance from potentially proceeding to arbitration since SEIU preserved the timelines. Disagreement with a union’s decision not to proceed to arbitration does not breach the duty of fair representation. The Board does not judge whether the union’s position is correct, only whether it was devoid of any rational basis or whether it was reached for arbitrary reasons. Local 250 communicated to Hessong its belief that the grievance lacked merit. While other of Hessong’s grievances were delayed, Local 250 preserved the timelines and did not abandon the grievances. It also kept Hessong apprised of their progress. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 257 | 09/17/04 |
| 1606E | California School Employees Association-Chapter 244 (Guitierrez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The slander allegation, which was timely filed, lacked any specificity regarding dates of occurrence, circumstances, the nature of the alleged slander, or the context of CSEA’s refusal to grieve the issue, did not meet the requirements of PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) and does not state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 93 | 02/26/04 |
| 1675M | Service Employees International Union Local 616 (Jeffers) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of fair representation applies even where contract allows employee to pursue grievance arbitration on his own without union’s consent. This is because union is the exclusive representative with a corresponding duty to enforce the terms of a contract for bargaining unit members. Such a situation differs from non-contractual based remedies where no duty of fair representation applies. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 240 | 08/19/04 |
| 1666M | Service Employees International Union Local 790 (Lowery) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Employee, whose license was suspended as a result of a DUI conviction, was terminated by employer for failure to possess a valid license. Union decline to represent employee at termination hearing on the grounds that the likelihood of success was minimal. Board dismissed charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation as union’s decision was not arbitrary or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 233 | 07/27/04 |
| 1636M | Service Employees International Union, Local 790, AFL-CIO (Banks, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging parties alleged that duty of fair representation was violated when union failed to submit certain evidence in a PERB unfair practice proceeding. Even if duty of fair representation existed, Board held that such an allegation fails to demonstrate that union acted without a rational basis or that its actions were devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 159 | 06/04/04 |
| 1575E | Chula Vista Elementary Educators Association (Larkins) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Board dismissed charge where charging party failed to allege any specific facts demonstrating that the union’s actions were arbitrary, discriminatory, undertaken in bad faith, lacked a rational basis, or were devoid of honest judgment. No duty for union to notify employee of PERB’s existence. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 42 | 12/30/03 |
| 1523E | California School Employees Association (De Lauer) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging party alleged violation of duty of fair representation where union refused to file grievance on her behalf seeking reinstatement. Employer policy stated that resignations were irrevocable. Under these facts, Board dismissed charge for failure to demonstrate that union’s decision was arbitrary. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 73 | 05/13/03 |
| 1487E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 77 (Vincelet) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Allegations that union failed to provide adequate representation at internal District administrative personnel hearing and that union failed to notify charging party of PERB’s existence, filing requirements, and deadlines failed to state a prima facie case because duty of fair representation is limited to contractual remedies under union’s exclusive control. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33097 | 06/28/02 |
| 1618M | International Union of Operating Engineers Local 39 (Siroky) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging party alleged that union violated duty of fair representation by refusing to provide further representation in a wage dispute. Union’s decision was based upon a legal opinion that further representation would be unsuccessful. Charge dismissed because charging party failed to demonstrate that union’s decision was without rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 132 | 04/16/04 |
| 1610M | Service Employees International Union Local 250 (Stewart) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Mere fact that some bargaining unit members are not satisfied with a collective bargaining agreement is insufficient by itself to demonstrate a prima facie violation. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 125 | 04/02/04 |
| 1603E | Shasta College Faculty Association (Sloan) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union’s duty of fair representation only extends to bargaining unit positions. Union not required to represent employee in loss of a position not in the bargaining unit. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 90 | 02/25/04 |
| 1572E | Fremont Unified District Teachers Association (Kaiser) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation imposed on the exclusive representative extends to grievance handling. In this case, the allegation is that the union failed to secure charging party an expedited grievance meeting. The Board has held that a union’s case-handling error (e.g., missing the deadline for filing a grievance) only constitutes negligence and does not rise to the level of arbitrary conduct sufficient to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The courts have recognized an exception to this rule where the union’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant. Here, however, there is no allegation that grievance was foreclosed or adversely affected. While union’s alleged handling of grievance may constitute negligence, there is otherwise no allegation of bad faith, discriminatory, or arbitrary conduct. Accordingly, charge must be dismissed for failure to state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 39 | 12/24/03 |
| 1554E | Chula Vista Elementary Education Association (Abrams) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge alleged that union’s removal of its employee representative from Peer and Assistance Review advisory committee violated union’s duty of fair representation. Board dismissed charge because duty of fair representation does not extend to internal union matters such as the union’s selection of its representative to a committee. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 9 | 10/22/03 |
| 1550E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 130 (Simpson) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Board dismissed charge alleging that union’s refusal to represent employee in a civil service commission hearing violated the union’s duty of fair representation. Board held that duty of fair representation only applies to proceedings where representation is exclusively provided by the union. Since charging party was free to represent herself before the commission, or hire an attorney to do so, Board held that duty of fair representation was not triggered. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 5 | 10/17/03 |
| 1553S | California State Employees Association, Service Employees International Union Local 1000, AFL-CIO, Central Labor Councils (Sutton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Statute of limitations for a charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation is six months and is triggered on the date the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party’s repeated requests for representation, in the face of steadfast refusals from the union, do not begin the limitations period anew. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 8 | 10/21/03 |
| 1517H | Coalition of Unviersity Employees (Buxton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To state a prima facie violation of Sections 3578 and 3571.1(b) of HEERA, the charging party must show that the union’s conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. A union’s failure to inform an employee of its progress in processing her grievance, its failure to respond to the employee’s request for clarification of the grievance, and its failure to notify the employee of the employer’s ultimate response approaches but does not meet the standard for arbitrariness under state and federal precedent. CUE reasonably understood that arbitration was not available under the expired Collective Bargaining Agreement and so its failure to inform Buxton of the progress of her grievance is not evidence of breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 51 | 04/07/03 |
| 1513E | Service Employees International Union, Local 790 (Fanene) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union’s decision not to represent employee at termination hearing was not arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith where union reviewed employee’s employment history and concluded that its changes for success were minimal. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 44 | 03/25/03 |
| 1515E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Fact that union breached its duty of fair representation to charging party in the past is not sufficient to establish current union conduct is also a violation. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 42 | 04/03/03 |
| 1494E | Oxnard Federation of Teachers (Torres) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Federation may refuse to pursue a grievance if it makes an honest and reasonable determination that the grievance lacks merit. Such a determination is not arbitrary. In addition, the Federation did not owe Torres a duty to represent him in non-contractual administrative matters or judicial actions. Torres thus failed to state a prima facie violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33107 | 07/31/02 |
| 1460E | California School Employees Association, Chapter 258 (Gerber) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case There is no breach of the duty of fair representation where charge contains no instances in which union has acted arbitrary or in bad faith with respect to its assessment of agency fees. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32110 | 09/06/01 |
| 1443E | Fremont Unified District Teachers Association (Turney) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of fair representation does not extend to the filing of unfair practice charges with PERB; p. 4, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32083 | 06/07/01 |
| 1432E | Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Robinson) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case of a breach of the duty of fair representation established where union met on numerous occasions with Charging Party and Charging Party failed to provide information requested by Union to assist with defense to employer's allegations. No prima facie case of a breach of the duty of fair representation established where Charging Party is a probationary restricted employee with no right to appeal dismissal. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32062 | 04/30/01 |
| 1401E | Riverside County Office Teachers Association (Mc Alpine, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case A conclusion that the Association acted without rational basis which does not set forth facts from which it becomes apparent how or in what manner the Association acted without rational basis is insufficient to state a prima facie case; p. 4, warning letter. The mere fact that charging parties were not satisfied with the agreement is insufficient to demonstrate a prima facie violation. The fact that the Association should have known the charging parties would be dissatisfied is also insufficient to demonstrate a breach of the duty of fair representation. The Association is not obligated to negotiate a specific provision for a group of unit members, nor did the Association fail to explain its rationale in reducing the amount the charging parties received. Nothing in the charge indicates the Association acted without rational basis; p. 5, warning letter. Allegation that the Association disparately treated charging parties by reducing their stipend while increasing the salaries of other teachers failed to explain how this violated the duty of fair representation. Association's conduct in making an agreement that favors some employees more than others does not violate the EERA; pp. 2-3, dismissal letter. It was unclear how a provision in the agreement which set up an advisory committee whose goal was to recommend salary adjustments violated the EERA, or demonstrated bad faith on the part of the Association. Even assuming the provision somehow extended the duration of the agreement beyond three years, the Association's failure to publicly notice this clause was not properly adjudicated as an unfair practice charge. As such, the allegation failed to demonstrate the Association breached its duty of fair representation; pp. 3-4 dismissal letter. Charging Parties lacked standing to allege that the District's proposal was a regressive proposal, or that the Association caused the District to engage in regressive bargaining, and allegation was dismissed. Moreover, the charge failed to provide any facts demonstrating the District violated the Act or that the Association caused the District to violate the Act. As such, the charge fails to state a prima facie violation; p. 4, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31144 | 08/31/00 |
| 1415E | California School Employees Association, Chapter 296 (Morrison) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Conversation regarding lack of participation in Union membership meetings standing alone does not constitute sufficient evidence that lack of participation resulted in union acting arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32020 | 12/07/00 |
| 1384E | San Bernardino Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Mitchell) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No DFR where union failed to pursue employee's theories. Union made clear it felt reassignment wasn't discriminatory and provided its reasoning. Employee's argument that union failed to provide a clear legally sound explanation for its position does not provide facts showing arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith by the union. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31096 | 05/11/00 |
| 1386E | California Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Torres) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case California Teachers Association, a state wide organization is not the exclusive representative and doe not owe employees a duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31098 | 05/18/00 |
| 1533E | Orange Unified Education Association and California Teachers Association (Rossman) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not violate duty of fair representation by agreeing to bargain over retirement benefits for current employees since such benefits are a permissive subject of bargaining. Mere fact that employee was not satisfied with the contract provision negotiated by union does not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The Board has held that an exclusive representative is not expected or required to satisfy all members of the unit it represents. Moreover, the duty of fair representation does not mean an employee organization is barred from making an agreement which may have an unfavorable effect on some members, nor is an employee organization obligated to bargain a particular item benefiting certain unit members. Although exclusive representative may accept direction from CTA hired executive director, CTA is no the exclusive representative for DFR purposes. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 93 | 06/23/03 |
| 1498E | California Teachers Association (Kaiser) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case California Teachers Association is not the exclusive representative and therefore does not owe employees a duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33114 | 08/27/02 |
| 1458E | Sacramento City Teachers Association (Marsh) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must show that the respondent's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. A charging party must at a minimum include an assertion of sufficient facts from which it becomes apparent how or in what manner the exclusive representative's action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment; p. 6, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32107 | 08/28/01 |
| 1474M | International Association of Machinists (Attard) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Under the MMBA unions owe a duty of fair representation to their members, and this requires them to refrain from representing their members arbitrarily, discriminatorily, or in bad faith. The duty of fair representation is not breached by mere negligence. In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation under the MMBA the charging party must, at a minimum, include an assertion of facts from which it becomes apparent in what manner the exclusive representative's action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33041 | 02/07/02 |
| 1476E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 8 (Thorpe, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of Fair Representation is owed to individual employee only, not to successor union. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33043 | 02/15/02 |
| 1456E | Hart District Teachers Association (Mercado and Bloch) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case A breach of the duty of fair representation occurs when a union's conduct toward a member of the bargaining unit is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; p. 13, proposed dec. An exclusive representative's duty of fair representation does not contemplate the complete satisfaction of all who are represented. A wide range of reasonableness must be allowed to a statutory bargaining representative in serving the unit it represents subject always to complete good faith and honesty of purpose in the exercise of its discretion; p. 6, proposed dec. Charging parties failed to present any evidence to support their claim that the exclusive representative's past practice was to consult with grievants prior to the final settlement of a grievance. Both charging parties had previously discussed the matter with the exclusive representative, and had informed it what they wanted out of the grievance prior to the final settlement. The exclusive representative's settlement of the grievance was based upon its understanding that both charging parties wanted to be high school counselors. The terms of the settlement agreement achieved these goals. The exclusive representative's settlement of the grievance had a rational basis, and was not arbitrary, discriminatory, nor in bad faith; p. 19, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32100 | 07/31/01 |
| 1269E | United Faculty Association of North Orange County Community College District (Kiszley) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To demonstrate a violation of EERA section 3543.6(b), the charging party must show that the Union's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith; p. 5, dismissal letter; p. 3, warning letter. No violation where union refused to take grievances to arbitration and explained its decision. No violation where union took case to arbitration and the arbitrator dismissed the case because it concerned a statutory notice. It was unsettled in the law whether such cases could be artitrated; p. 5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29109 | 06/18/98 |
| 1348E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation because the facts do not demonstrate that the federation's investigation was inadequate or that the federation's decision to represent charging party in 1994 demonstrated a shifting or inconsistent justification for its decision not to represent charging party in grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30168 | 09/29/99 |
| 1349E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation because the facts do not demonstrate that the federation's investigation was inadequate or that the federation's decision to represent charging party in 1994 demonstrated a shifting or inconsistent justification for its decision not to represent charging party in grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30169 | 09/29/99 |
| A270E | Davis Teachers Association (Heffner) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The national affiliate of an exclusive representative does not become an exclusive representative through affiliation with a local chapter; p. 7, ALJ's order. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27002 | 11/07/95 |
| A265E | Teamsters Local 137 (Illum and DeMuro) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Allegations of inconsistent statements, disparaging remarks and conflict of interest did not state a prima facie violation of EERA section 3543.6 because charging parties did not establish that employee organization's action or inaction was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26049 | 02/17/95 |
| 1321E | American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Martin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case A union may exercise its discretion to determine how far to pursue a grievance in the employee's behalf as long as it does not arbitrarily ignore a meritorious grievance or process a grievance in a perfunctory fashion. A union is also not required to process an employee's grievance if the chances for success are minimal. A union's decision not to continue to pursue a grievance, regardless of the merits, is not a violation of the duty of fair representation. With regard to the union's duty of fair representation after arbitration, an arbitration decision is ordinarily final, except where the union does not represent the employee properly at the arbitration proceeding. However, in order to prove this, the employee must show more than a mere error in judgment. He must establish that the union was guilty of malfeasance, dishonesty, bad faith, or discriminatory treatment, or that it acted in a perfunctory or arbitrary fashion; was guilty of malfeasance, dishonesty, bad faith, or discriminatory treatment, or that it acted in a perfunctory or arbitrary fashion; conduct, the member must show blatant unfairness by union. None was demonstrated here. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30091 | 04/02/99 |
| 1289E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Seliga) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie case for violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must allege facts demonstrating that Association's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith; p. 5, warning letter. Failure to set aside Chapter Chair election is a purely internal union affair which does not have a substantial impact on the employment relationship and does not give rise to duty of fair representation; the fact that employee's principal felt free to intimidate her as a result of union's decision does not demonstrate impact; p. 6, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29171 | 10/08/98 |
| 1276E | United Teachers-Los Angeles (Reilly) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not breach duty of fair representation when it pursued grievance to the point of arbitration and sent certified letter to inform grievant of Union's decision not to proceed with arbitration and of procedure to appeal that decision even though charging party did not receive the letter; p. 3, warning letter. Despite allegations of several disagreements between Union and grievant, charge fails to allege facts demonstrating that Union actions were arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; pp. 3-4, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29126 | 07/23/98 |
| 1277E | United Teachers-Los Angeles (Williams) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union did not owe a duty of fair representation to employee who did not work sufficient hours to qualify as member of bargaining unit; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29129 | 08/13/98 |
| 1241E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Violation of the duty of fair representation occurs when an exclusive representative union exhibits arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct toward a union member in representing that member in a matter arising out of the collective bargaining relationship; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29028 | 12/09/97 |
| 1238E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case for breach of the duty of fair representation, where charge fails to allege facts showing how or in what manner the exclusive representative failed to pursue grievance for arbitrary, discriminatory, or bad faith reasons; p. 4, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29021 | 12/02/97 |
| 1226S | California Correctional Peace Officers Association (Smith, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation under the Dills Act derives from the exclusivity of the representational relationship; p. 2 (citations). Respondent is not the Charging Parties' exclusive representative and owed no representational duty to the charging parties; therefore, they cannot state a prima facie cause of action for violation of that duty; Id. at p. 3. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29006 | 11/05/97 |
| 1199S | California State Employees Association (Carrillo) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of fair representation does not extend to fora such as a Coleman hearing or writ of mandate where exclusive representative does not possess exclusive means by which employee can obtain remedy; p. 2, warning letter. Union did not violate duty of fair representation where it refused to represent charging party after she rejected settlement agreement procured by the union; p. 6, warning letter. CSEA's stalling in handling grievance and failure to apprise you of status was insufficient; p. 7, dismissal letter. Negligent failure to file appeal in a timely manner insufficient to state prima facie case for violation of duty of fair representation; p. 6, warning letter. The Board's analysis of discrimination and duty of fair representation under Dills is the same as under EERA. The Board's analysis of discrimination and duty of fair representation under Dills is the same as under EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28099 | 05/14/97 |
| 1200E | San Jose Community College Faculty Association (Maestas-Flores) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must show that the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith (citations); p. 5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28108 | 06/02/97 |
| 1183E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Shade) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union's refusal to pursue grievances to arbitration by itself does not state a DFR violation. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28052 | 02/20/97 |
| 1147E | Mt. San Jacinto College Faculty Association (Vasek) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, charging party must show specifically what was requested of the union, what the union did, the contractual basis for the grievance and that the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith (citations); pp. 2-3, warning letter. Duty of fair representation does not require an exclusive representative to advise an employee accurately concerning rights and duties pertaining to the exercise of legal remedies outside of the collective bargaining agreement including the existence of EERA and PERB; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27064 | 03/15/96 |
| 1140E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Articles in the union newspaper about an employees' grievances and charges against the union do not have a substantial impact on unit members to the employer, they are relationship internal union affairs which are largely immune from scrutiny under the duty of fair representation analysis (citations); p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27047 | 02/27/96 |
| 1135E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case It is not irrational for a union to: (1) drop a grievance over a performance evaluation where the evaluation has been improved to a "meets standards", (2) inform the employer of its decision, or (3) publish its position regarding unfairs filed against it. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27033 | 01/29/96 |
| 1130H | International Union of Operating Engineers Local 501 (Cutshall and Wack) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union's dismissal of its superior court petition to confirm an arbitration award without informing the grievants is not arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Even if the union was guilty of negligence or poor judgment, that does not establish a violation of the union's duty to fairly represent its members; p. 6, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27025 | 01/05/96 |
| 1132E | American Federation of Teachers College Staff Guild, Local 1521 (Mrvichin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The exclusive representative may withdraw from representation if it feels that its client is not following its advice and acting independently in a manner which undermines that representation process. This is not arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct. Correspondingly, an employee may terminate his relationship with the exclusive representative if he feels that it is not acting in his best interest. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27027 | 01/11/96 |
| 1118E | Alum Rock Education Association (Kirkaldie) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Breach of a duty of fair representation occurs when a union's conduct toward a member of the bargaining unit is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; as a threshold matter the facts of the case must strongly support a violation of the collective bargaining agreement; p. 9, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26143 | 10/04/95 |
| 1109E | American Federation of Teachers College Guild, Local 1521 (Saxton) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Allegation that employee organization representative breached its duty to fairly represent member based on representative's statement that she was pleased at no longer having to represent member did not constitute violation; pp. 10-11, proposed dec. Burden is upon charging party to show how union abused its discretion and not on union to show that it properly exercised it; p. 11, proposed dec. No obligation on union to provide employee with a representative of her choice as selection is an internal union matter not subject to DFR. Nor is failure to provide a certain representative an adverse action. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26103 | 05/31/95 |
| 1111E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Sander) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to prove a violation of the duty of fair representation, the charging parties must show that the employee organization's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith (citation); p. 15, proposed dec. Disparaging remarks about an employee to an employer by the exlusive representative lend support to an inference of unlawful motivation, but the statements themselves do not constitute an independent violation of EERA; p. 18, proposed dec. Duty of fair representation does not extend to pre-collective bargaining agreement events; p. 21, proposed dec. There is no duty of fair representation owed to a unit member unless the exclusive representative possesses the exclusive means by which such employee can obtain a particular remedy (citation); id., p. 22. Allegations of violation of general CBA provisions are insufficient to such employee can obtain a particular remedy (citation); id., p. 22. Allegations of violation of general CBA provisions are insufficient to more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26111 | 07/21/95 |
| 1108E | California School Employees Association (Chacon) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of EERA, charging party must prove that the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26102 | 05/25/95 |
| 1099S | California State Employees Association (Fox) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The union had no obligation to file an unfair practice charge on behalf of the employee against the employer; p. 2, dismissal letter. The union has no obligation to represent the charging party before the State Personnel Board. The union's denial of financial assistance to hire private counsel for representation before the SPB is outside the duty of fair representation; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26091 | 05/04/95 |
| 1089E | California School Employees Association (Hare) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Even if collective bargaining agreement gives union member right to arbitrate his own grievance, union's refusal to allow member to exercise that right does not state a prima facie violation of EERA. Under EERA section 3543, once the employee requests the union to pursue his/her grievance to arbitration, pursuit of the grievance is within the sole discretion of the union (Chaffey Joint Union High School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 202); pp. 2-3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26067 | 03/13/95 |
| 1064S | California Union of Safety Employees (John) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Although the Dills Act does not specifically provide for an employee organization's duty of fair representation, such a duty has been inferred from the fact that the Dills Act provides for exclusive representation; pp. 8-9. No duty owed unless exclusive representative posses the exclusive means by which an employee can obtain a particular remedy. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26004 | 11/01/94 |
| 1054E | Amalgamated Transit Union Local 256 (Gibson) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union cannot proceed to process a grievance in a perfunctory manner. Even though union failed to process grievance, charging party alleged no facts that showed that the union's conduct in failing to pursue the grievance was anything more than mere negligence. more or view all topics or full text. | 18 | 25127 | 09/06/94 |
| 1046H | California Faculty Association (Macdonald) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union's decision not to arbitrate a grievance is not arbitrary where employer's response to the grievance did not seem to address the merits of the grievance. more or view all topics or full text. | 18 | 25075 | 05/06/94 |
| 1032S | California Union of Safety Employees (Coelho) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The Dills Act duty of fair representation does not apply to representation in the employer's internal investigation of a citizen's complaint because that forum is unconnected with any aspect of negotiation or administration of a collective bargaining agreement and the union does not exclusively control the means to the particular remedy; p. 15. The prohibition against an employee organization's discrimination or retaliation against employees because of their protected activity is not limited to those functions of the exclusive representative which carry with them the duty of fair representation; p. 16. more or view all topics or full text. | 18 | 25029 | 01/06/94 |
| 1017E | Victor Elementary Teachers Association (Janssen) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case It is not apparent how the inaction by the union was without a rational basis, or was devoid of honest judgment, discriminatory, or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24168 | 10/08/93 |
| 0967S | California Union of Safety Employees (Baima) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Although the Dills Act does not contain a specific statutory provision setting out the duty of fair representation, PERB decisions have assumed the existence of a duty under the Dills Act; p. 12, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24029 | 01/19/93 |
| 0970E | United Teachers - Los Angeles (Wyler) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Burden is on charging party to show how exclusive representative abused its discretion, and not on exclusive representative to show how it properly exercised its discretion. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24040 | 02/08/93 |
| 0953E | California School Employees Association (Kotch) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case As exclusive representative's advise regarding grievance was consistent with contractual language, Board found insufficient facts alleged to show arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct; p. 11, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23163 | 10/05/92 |
| 0909E | Corona-Norco Teachers Association (Paloma) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge dismissed for failure to state a prima facie case of a breach of the duty of fair representation. Failure to notify in writing of decision not to pursue grievance to arbitration not arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22175 | 11/07/91 |
| 0902E | San Diego Teachers Association (Hernandez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, 3543.6(b), charging party must show that exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Arbitrary conduct requires a showing of conduct that was without rational basis or devoid of honest judgment; pp. 4-5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22152 | 09/19/91 |
| 0897E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, California Federation of Teachers/American Federation of Teachers/Local 2279 (Deglow, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Breach of the duty of fair representation has been stated where it is alleged that exclusive representative knowingly misrepresented a fact in order to secure from its constituents their ratification of a contract. No prima facie case where alleged misrepresentation was a statement of law indicating a nonmember's obligation to pay an agency fee; dismissal letter, p. 2. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22137 | 08/29/91 |
| 0898E | California School Employees Association (Lohmann) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of EERA section 3544.9, a charging party must show that the association's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; warning letter, p. 8. Even if the exclusive representative promised to appear at a hearing and then fails to attend, without facts showing that the failure to attend was motivated by bad faith, arbitrary conduct or capriciousness, no prima facie case is stated; p. 2. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22138 | 08/30/91 |
| 0896E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, California Federation of Teachers/American Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation of its duty of fair representation where employee organization failed to notify all bargaining unit members of an upcoming agency fee election; dismissal letter, p. 4 and warning letter, pp. 3-4. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22133 | 08/14/91 |
| 0889E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, California Federation of Teachers/American Federation of Teachers (Violett) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In order to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, a charging party must show that the union's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Arbitrary conduct requires a showing of conduct that was without rational basis or was devoid of honest judgment; p. 8. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22107 | 06/19/91 |
| 0881H | International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 501 (Irvin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge dismissed for failure to state a prima facie case of breach of DFR when exclusive rep. refused to proceed to arbitration or allow third party proceed to arbitration. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22092 | 05/22/91 |
| 0882E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, American Federation of Teachers/CIO (Barth) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case of the breach of duty of fair representation where it was alleged that the federation did not fairly represent each and every employee in the bargaining unit in establishing the organizational security fees. There was no indication of arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22093 | 05/24/91 |
| 0877E | Los Rios Community College District 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To show a violation of DFR, charging party must show that exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; arbitrary conduct requires showing that conduct was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment; p. 11. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22083 | 05/16/91 |
| 0797E | United Teachers-Los Angeles (Farrar) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case of the breach of duty of fair representation where it was alleged that the union failed to enter into evidence certain evidence and documents, and the union displaced the grievant's chosen representative at the grievance and arbitration hearings. These could be construed, at most, as evidence of negligence. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21078 | 03/22/90 |
| 0760S | Professional Engineers in California Government (Lopez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No DFR breach stated by allegations that union turned over unfavorable evidence at Skelly hearing or failed to send representative to explain various provisions of contract. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20190 | 09/13/89 |
| 0746H | California Faculty Association (Mirhady) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charges of the representative's failure to follow charging party's direction as to which witnesses to call, which argument to raise, or the assessment of the case is insufficient to state a prima facie case; p. 4, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20142 | 06/26/89 |
| 0709H | California Faculty Association (Hollis) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation of duty of fair representation where charging party failed to allege that exclusive representative's action was without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgement. RA dismissal upheld. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20017 | 12/21/88 |
| 0669E | Chaffey Joint Union High School District (Fikes) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Totality of exclusive representative's conduct during agency fee election constituted prima facie case of breach of duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 12 | 19082 | 05/31/88 |
| 0660E | California School Employees Association (Mrvichin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Evidentiary facts, not conclusions (e.g., "union did not approach the case with open mind, did not investigate case with care, failed to adequately present case," etc.) must be alleged to constitute a prima facie violation of EERA section 3543.6 and 3544.9. Statement by union representative that charging party "should be fired" insufficient to state prima facie case of discrimination or breach of duty of fair representation where: statement appears to be an expression of personal opinion; no showing that the statement led to union's failure to exercise duties owed to charging party or led it to act in arbitrary, bad faith, or discriminatory fashion toward employee; and no facts demonstrate that the union rep making the statement interfered with relationship between employee and employer. more or view all topics or full text. | 12 | 19051 | 04/01/88 |
| 0661E | California School Employees Association (Mrvichin) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge must show that union handled grievance in arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith manner. more or view all topics or full text. | 12 | 19052 | 04/01/88 |
| 0627E | Los Angeles School District Peace Officer's Association (Brown) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case where factual allegations regarding alleged breach of settlement agreement fail to describe arbitary, capricious or bad faith conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18117 | 06/23/87 |
| 0612S | American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Cupp) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No breach of DFR where union's refusal to process grievances occurred more than 6 months before charge filed. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18048 | 02/06/87 |
| 0614S | California State Employees Association (Morrow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Although SEERA contains no specific statutory provision setting out the DFR, PERB decisions have assumed that it does exist and has found the breach a violation of SEERA section 3519.5(b); p. 11, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18055 | 02/20/87 |
| 0596H | California State Employees Association (O'Connell) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Prima facie case stated where alleged that union knowingly misrepresented a fact in order to secure from members ratification of contract. more or view all topics or full text. | 11 | 18010 | 12/16/86 |
| 0590H | California State Employees Association (Dees) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No prima facie case where no indication of arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct during proceeding six months. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17162 | 09/25/86 |
| 0576E | Modesto Teachers Association (Lagos) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No DFR prima facie case where union refused to proceed to arbitration because it had recently lost an arbitration on a virtually identical issue. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17123 | 06/25/86 |
| 0577E | California School Employees Association (Petrich) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No DFR prima facie case where charging party fails to allege coercive effect of union's conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17124 | 06/25/86 |
| 0545S | California State Employees Association (Lemmons and Lund) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Failure to pursue grievances to arbitration insufficient without allegations reflecting arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17017 | 12/13/85 |
| 0546S | California State Employees Association (Darzins) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Refusal to pursue claim due to perceived lack of merit, not arbitrary discriminatory or in bad faith, even if perception mistaken. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17018 | 12/13/85 |
| 0539S | Union of American Physicians and Dentists (Stewart) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Prima facie case stated where union refused to accept tender of full dues amount paid in protest, allegedly in retaliation for successful small claims suit. more or view all topics or full text. | 10 | 17008 | 12/05/85 |
| 2486M | Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers West (Lacey) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Board affirmed and adopted dismissal of charge and complaint alleging exclusive representative had violated its duty of fair representation by not timely filing and, once filed, not pursuing, a grievance challenging employee’s release during probationary period for alleged misconduct. Charging party presented no evidence to show that exclusive representative’s interpretation of contract provisions governing probationary release was arbitrary, discriminatory or advanced in bad faith. Even if representative’s interpretation had been incorrect, charging party did not show that any reasonable alternative interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement would call into question representative’s interpretation that a grievance challenging charging party’s termination stood little to no chance of success. more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 24 | 06/30/16 |
| 1959E | Sacramento City Teachers Association (Franz) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation of duty of fair representation where Union did not misrepresent that state mediator was present at Charging Party’s grievance hearing. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 86 | 05/30/08 |
| 1217S | California Correctional Peace Officers Association (Horspool) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Board will find violation of duty of fair representation only if the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. Because exclusive representative has duty to represent all the members of the bargaining unit, a good faith, rational and nondiscriminatory settlement agreement that benefits some unit members and not others does not violate the duty of fair representation; p. 3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28146 | 09/18/97 |
| 1218S | California Correctional Peace Officers Association (Negrete) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Board will find violation of duty of fair representation only if the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. Because exclusive representative had duty to represent all the members of the bargaining unit, a good faith, rational, and nondiscriminatory settlement agreement that benefits some unit members and not others does not violate the duty of fair representation; p. 3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28147 | 09/18/97 |
| 1219E | Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Wardlaw) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The charging party failed to state a prima facie case of failure of the duty of fair representation and did not allege how the union's actions were in bad faith or discriminated against him, or how the union abused its discretion. (United Teachers of Los Angeles (Collins) (1982) PERB Decision No. 258.) more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28158 | 09/24/97 |
| 1207S | California State Employees Association (Brushia) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Union's instruction that charging party remain quiet unless questioned during Coleman hearing was not arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. Union's instruction that charging party not introduce documents at Coleman hearing does not amount to violation of duty of fair representation; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28118 | 06/23/97 |
| 1208E | Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (Bernath) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Two year old newsletter referring to charging party's earlier protected activity is insufficient to establish that union's failure to pursue grievance to second level was discriminatory; pp. 3-4, warning letter. Mere fact that union successfully pursued similar grievance several years earlier is insufficient to establish lack of rational basis for decision not to pursue present grievance; p. 4, warning letter. Request for sanctions by Respondent is not itself an unlawful act. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28121 | 06/23/97 |
| 1212E | California School Employees Association, Chapter 413 (Gonzalez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The exclusive representative's refusal to represent the employee does not establish a prima facie showing of a duty of fair representation because the charging party must establish sufficient facts showing that the exclusive representative's inaction was without rational basis or devoid of honest judgment; p. 3, dismissal letter; p. 3 warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28123 | 06/24/97 |
| 0508E | California School Employees Association-Chapter 616 (Tornetta) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Dismissal upheld in fair representation case; charging party alleged union failed to properly negotiate salary step raise for her; insufficient facts where charging party received 3 step increase, more than all but 2 classifications. Union has no obligation to inform individual members of status of each particular proposal affecting them during negotiations. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16154 | 06/21/85 |
| 0509E | Compton Education Association (Sanders) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Failure to state prima facie case where allegations are that union failed to take pre-negotiation vote on benefit plan; no contractual/ by-law procedure for such vote; mere internal union affairs not basis for DFR breach. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16155 | 06/21/85 |
| 0496H | California State Employees Association (Dees) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case PERB has followed NLRB and federal court interpretations of DFR. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16100 | 03/14/85 |
| 0497H | California State Employees Association (Calloway) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charge fails to state facts reflecting that decision to deny representation was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16101 | 03/14/85 |
| 0427E | California School Employees Association (Ciaffoni, et al.) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Exclusive representative's failure to fully explain terms of the settlement agreement in unfair practice case is at most mere negligence. Charging parties did not understand that under the settlement money to be paid by employer would be shared by all persons in affected class and not just persons attending meeting to ratify settlement. Mere negligence is insufficient to state prima facie case of violation of DFR. R.A. dismissal upheld. Allegation that exclusive representative settled case for too little money does not state arbitrary, bad faith or discriminatory action. more or view all topics or full text. | 8 | 15211 | 11/06/84 |
| 0341E | Service Employees International Union (Scates) (Pitts) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of fair representation outlined in proposed decision adopted by Board. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14239 | 08/29/83 |
| 0342E | California School Employees Association (Dyer) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Where employee organization filed superior court action and court deferred to administrative exhaustion, and charging party had withdrawn unfair practice charge, refusal to appeal superior court action is not per se, a discriminatory, bad faith decision made without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment or a breach of the duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14242 | 09/02/83 |
| 0342Ea | California School Employees Association (Dyer) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Employee organizations' non appeal of superior court decision was consequence of conscious decision based upon the exercise of judgment and not an "unexcused and unexplained failure to perform a ministerial act," that might support failure of duty of fair representation within meaning of Dutrisac v. Caterpillar Tractor Co. more or view all topics or full text. | 8 | 15086 | 05/22/84 |
| 0332E | Reed District Teachers Association (Reyes) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Statute of limitations applies to conduct alleged to violate duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14224 | 08/15/83 |
| 0203E | Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Pottorff) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In determining whether exclusive representative violated EERA, the same analysis applies whether internal union activities are examined under section 3544.9 or under 3543.6(b). No violation found; p. 6. more or view all topics or full text. | 6 | 13079 | 03/30/82 |
| 0992E | Los Rios California Federation of Teachers (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case The duty of fair representation does not extend to a forum which has no connection to collective bargaining, such as where an employee has the right to appear, or a forum which involves an individual right unconnected to negotiating or administering a collective bargaining agreement; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24085 | 04/27/93 |
| 0984H | American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Alvarez) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Charging party failed to state a prima facie case that the exclusive representative violated its duty of fair representation by failing to consult with or allow a vote of employees in job classes transferred between bargaining units by agreement between the University and AFSCME. The union's conduct was not arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith, or without rational basis and devoid of honest judgment; pp. 2-4, warning letter; pp. 2-3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24064 | 03/23/93 |
| 0980S | California State Employees Association (Cohen) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case In the absence of facts showing that its decision was made for arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith reasons, the reassessment of the merits of the grievance does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation; p. 5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24054 | 03/12/93 |
| 0125E | Fremont UD Teachers Association (King) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Conduct in violation of section 3544.9 is actionable under section 3543.6(b); pp. 4-6. more or view all topics or full text. | 4 | 11071 | 04/21/80 |
| 0106E | Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Kimmett) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case To constitute an unfair practice, separate from DFR, union conduct must tend to or actually result in some harm to EERA guaranteed rights. See Carlsbad #89; sections 3540 and 3543 do not give employees more rights in the internal activities of an employee organization than they have under section 3544.9; p. 13. more or view all topics or full text. | 3 | 10134 | 10/19/79 |
| 0950E | Los Rios California Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (Deglow) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case No violation of duty of fair representation where exclusive representative returned agency fees, refused to collect future agency fees, and denied request for an agency fee determination hearing; pp. 2-3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23147 | 09/01/92 |
| 0934E | United Teachers-Los Angeles (Vigil) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Burden is on charging party to show how exclusive representative abused its discretion, and not on exclusive representative to show how it properly exercised its discretion; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23078 | 05/19/92 |
| 0925E | California School Employees Association (LaFountain) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Dismissal of DFR charge upheld where allegations untimely and failed to allege a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23049 | 03/10/92 |
| 0923E | California School Employees Association (Professional School Bus Drivers Association) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Duty of fair representation does not extend to the enforcement of rights under the Education Code; p. 2, warning letter. Charging party did not show how union's refusal to represent hourly bus drivers, or refusal to pay legal expenses for a lawsuit, was without a rational basis, devoid of honest judgment, discriminatory or in bad faith; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23038 | 02/19/92 |
| 0072E | Redlands Teachers Association (Faeth and McCarty) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case DFR breach requires arbitrary, discriminatory or bad faith conduct; p. 5, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. | 2 | 2200 | 09/25/78 |
| 0068E | Mt. Diablo Unified School District (Quarrick and O'Brien) 800.01000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION; In General; Prima Facie Case Breach of DFR constitutes violation of sec. 3543.6(b); p. 13. more or view all topics or full text. | 2 | 2174 | 08/21/78 |