All notes for Subtopic 803.02000 – Proper Uses
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1607H | California Nurses Association (O'Malley) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Under Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279, CFT/AFT (Deglow) (1992) PERB Decision No. 950, once CNA refunded the collected fees in full to O’Malley, CNA could not use the fees in any way, let along wrongfully use them. Thus there is no possibility of harm that the Board could remedy. CNA’s refund of agency fees to O’Malley does not violate PERB’s agency fee regulations (PERB Regs. 32990-32997). Those regulations presume the possession of collected fees by either the exclusive representative or deposit in an escrow account pursuant to PERB Regulation 32995 more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 117 | 03/18/04 |
| 1626H | California State Employees Association, California State University Division (Sarca) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Board rejected charging party’s contention that union’s surplus funds must be subtracted from any expenses charged to agency fee payers. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 147 | 04/29/04 |
| 1446H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Witke) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Charging party alleged the arbitrator's award was repugnant to the Act because a comparison of the respondent's financial statements and the respondent's IRS forms revealed different figures, and that the respondent used different accounting methods to calculate these figures. However, the charge failed to demonstrate that such a comparison rendered the decision clearly repugnant to the Act. The award analyzed the respondent's system for identifying chargeable and non-chargeable expenses and concluded the system was fair and reasonable. Even in a case where PERB may have reached different conclusions than the arbitrator, that alone does not demonstrate the award is repugnant to the Act; p. 4, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32086 | 06/21/01 |
| 1417E | Sweetwater Union High School District 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Union may lawfully charge agency fee payors an amount equal to union dues. Union has obligation to provide agency fee payors with notice of their right to pay a reduced service fee and of their right to challenge the amount of the reduced service fee set by the union. Statement that the fee is equivalent to the dues is not inaccurate or a violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32024 | 01/26/01 |
| 1482H | California Faculty Association (Malamud) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses An arbitrator’s ruling that agency fee calculation may include CFA affiliate expenditures is not repugnant to HEERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 26 | 33074 | 05/30/02 |
| 1295E | ABC Federation of Teachers, American Federation of Teachers (Murray, et al.) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses PERB will defer to an arbitrator's award in an agency fee objection case and refuse to issue a complaint where: (1) the arbitration proceedings were fair and regular; and (2) the arbitrator's award is not clearly repugnant to the purposes of EERA. Established case law as well as PERB Regulation 32994(b)(6) specifically require the exclusive representative to bear the burden of establishing the reasonableness of the agency fee amount. Since the arbitrator placed the burden on the opposite party (the objectors), the Board agent found that the arbitrator's award is contrary to PERB regulations and is, therefore, repugnant to the purposes of EERA. Although the union bears the burden of proving reasonableness of the agency fee, absolute precision is not required in the calculation of the agency fee. agency fee, absolute precision is not required in the calculation of the agency fee. An error of less than one-tenth of one percent of total expenses does not violate union's duty to set amount of agency fee. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30007 | 10/22/98 |
| 1070E | Davis Teachers Association (Carlson) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Hudson notices and reductions are not required for religious objectors, because Hudson notification and reduction of service fees are only afforded to agency fee payers; p. 8, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26025 | 11/29/94 |
| 0958E | Kings Canyon Educational Association (Largent) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses It is only when a nonmember service fee payer objects to paying a fee which includes purposes beyond a union's representational obligations that his fee must be reduced (Cumero v. Public Employment Relations Board (1989) 49 Cal.3d 575, 589-590); p. 1, dismissal letter. It is the union's spending of the fee on activities unrelated to it's duty as exclusive representative that can be the subject of objection. A nonmember who selected the option to contribute the "sum equal to dues or service fee" to a charitable fund provided for in the CBA is not entitled to pay a reduced amount under Hudson; pp. 2-3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24001 | 11/18/92 |
| 0197E | King City High School District Association, et al. (Cumero) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses Agency fee payor is not required to support activities which are beyond the union's representational obligations. However, representa- tional obligations extend beyond actual negotiations, contract admini- stration and grievance adjustment; pp. 10-11. Political activity is not beyond union's representational obligation if its underlying purpose is employee representation; p. 15. Lobbying activity concerning legislation on school financing and employee working conditions is legitimate pursuit of representational objectives; p. 15. Union support of or opposition to individual candidates are improper uses of agency fees. Organizational activities with respect to employees covered by EERA are properly funded by agency fees; pp. 18-19. Affiliation dues may be financed from compulsory service fees; p. 19. Union publications may be funded with agency fees where the content of publication is representation oriented; pp. 19-20. fees; p. 19. Union publications may be funded with agency fees where the content of publication is representation oriented; pp. 19-20. is unrelated to its representational duties, which is administered independently of permissible functions, and where the costs of such administration are severable from permissable administrative costs, service fees should not be used to finance them; p. 21. The use of service fees to defend against a charge that union violated its duty of fair representation is not impermissible unless the defense is frivolous or taken in bad faith; p. 31. Group legal services for representation of members and nonmembers alike on employment-related matters only are services toward which nonmembers are properly obligated to contribute through service fees; p. 31. Using agency fees to pay for insurance which is provided free to members is improper. Refund ordered in form of reduction of agency fee; p. 32. more or view all topics or full text. | 6 | 13065 | 03/03/82 |
| 0950E | Los Rios California Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (Deglow) 803.02000: UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; UNION SECURITY; AGENCY/FAIR SHARE FEE; DUES DEDUCTION/CHECK OFF; Proper Uses As right to prevent unauthorized uses of agency fees had not been violated, the exclusive representative need not provide an agency fee determination hearing; p. 3, warning letter. 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 |