All notes for Subtopic 900.07000 – Mediation
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A507M | City of Stockton 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation “Appointment or selection of a mediator” in MMBA section 3505.4 and PERB Regulation 32802 means appointment or selection of a post-impasse mediator. Where an employer and a union agree to use a pre-impasse mediator to fulfill a post-impasse mediation process required pursuant to local rules or negotiation ground rules, the mediator selected pre-impasse takes on a legally significant new role after impasse, which amounts to a constructive reappointment or reselection. In contrast, where mediation is purely voluntary, PERB will not find constructive reappointment when a mediator chosen pre-impasse meets with the parties post-impasse. In that circumstance, the window for requesting factfinding is the 30 days after a written declaration of impasse. (pp. 6-7.) more or view all topics or full text. | 48 | 97 | 12/21/23 |
| A426M | Lassen County In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation The date of the “appointment or selection of a mediator,” which triggers the window period for a union to request factfinding under MMBA, is not rescinded when the mediator notifies the parties he or she is unable to keep the original mediation date, but requests additional dates the parties would be available in case he or she in unable to find a replacement. A mediator’s requesting additional dates from the parties is inconsistent with a rescission of the original appointment. It is up to the union to keep track of the statutory window period for filing its request for factfinding, regardless of whether mediation dates are changed. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 20 | 06/25/15 |
| 1600M | County of San Joaquin 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation There is no precedent for the Board to enforce a non-binding mediator’s recommendation. Local 790 failed to show how the County’s failure to provide a rationale for not adopting the mediator’s recommendations violated the MMBA. The County’s Employer-Employee Relations Policy gives the County discretion to adopt a hearing officer’s proposed decision. Local 790’s citation to the standard in Topanga Association for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles (1974) 11 Cal. 3d 506, 515 [113 Cal. Rptr. 836] that “the agency must make findings that bridge the analytic gap between the raw evidence and the ultimate decision or order” is inapplicable to this case. This is because it involves a local agency review of a variance permit under standards set by statute, the variance hearing occurred and was under review by the court. Here, Local 790 alleged violation of a local rule which the County adopted after good faith negotiations with Local 790 or its predecessor and there is no evidence that the mediator’s decision was ever brought before the County’s board for adoption. Local 790’s argument that state policy favors mediation and by ignoring the mediator’s recommendation, the County violated this policy fails. The cases cited by Local 790 pertain to the State’s policy favoring binding arbitration, not non-binding mediation. Local 790’s allegation on appeal that the charge incorporated by reference the mediator’s findings regarding failure to provide information is ambiguous. If it refers to “changed conditions” or “retaliation” allegations in the charge, then this allegation is dismissed under PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5), which requires a charge to contain a clear and concise statement of the facts. Otherwise, Local 790 appears to raise a new issue on appeal and under PERB Regulation 32635(b) has not provided good cause to present new allegations on appeal. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 86 | 02/24/04 |
| A058E | San Mateo County Community College District 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation Decision of regional director to withdraw appointment of mediator and suspend mediation affirmed, where valid decertification petition filed 14 months after voluntary recognition of exclusive representative and parties had yet to agree on contract and had just been certified at impasse; withdrawal of appointment of mediator proper to preserve neutral election environment; pp. 5-6. more or view all topics or full text. | 3 | 10035 | 02/14/79 |
| A046E | Oakdale Union Elementary School District 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation Board affirmed regional director's decision to deny request for post-factfinding mediation where one party did not desire mediation and where regional director determined, based on knowledge of negotiation history, that mediation would not be beneficial in helping parties to reach agreement; p. 5. EERA section 3548.1 does not mandate post-factfinding mediation; it merely authorizes its occurrence; p. 4. Legal status of retroactive pay increase, as one issue unresolved between the parties, is irrelevant in determination of whether post-factfinding mediation would help parties to reach agreement; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 2 | 2182 | 09/13/78 |
| 1160S | State of California (Department of Education) 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation To determine whether the employer refused to participate in good faith in mediation, PERB uses the "per se" or "totality of conduct" test depending on the specific conduct involved and the effect of the conduct on the negotiating process; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27113 | 06/20/96 |
| 0136E | Fremont Unified School District * * * VACATED IN PART by Fremont Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 136a 900.07000: IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH; Mediation * * * VACATED IN PART by Fremont Unified School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 136a, where on remand from the Court of Appeal the Board vacated the portion of Decision No. 136 that found the district had failed or refused to meet and negotiate in good faith. * * *Employer treatment of mediation as a mere springboard to factfinding, with no effort to resolve or narrow differences, is evidence of bad faith. more or view all topics or full text. | 4 | 11118 | 06/19/80 |