Decision 0220E – El Monte Union High School District

LA-CE-1243

Decision Date: June 30, 1982

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 6
Perc Index: 13160

Decision Headnotes

1310.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION
1310.01000 – In General

A recognition agreement clause preventing the parties from seeking to clarify or amend the unit did not preclude PERB from modifying the unit to include summer school and hourly employees. The petitioning union did not violate the agreement because it did not attempt to alter the unit, but filed a petition for recognition of the employees. PERB, exercising its statutory powers to determine appropriate units, treated the recognition request as a modification petition. Parties cannot contract away PERB's statutory jurisdiction; pp. 4-6. PERB's unit modification regulations do not require the holding of an election before a modification in the unit can be implemented. It is within PERB's discretion to decide under what circumstances it might consider an election appropriate. Passage of time does not by itself compel a new election; pp. 9-10. consider an election appropriate. Passage of time does not by itself compel a new election; pp. 9-10.

102.00000 – PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; SCOPE OF PERB JURISDICTION
102.01000 – In General/Exclusive Initial Jurisdiction-Deferral to Arbitration; Deference by Reviewing Courts

A recognition agreement clause preventing the parties from seeking to clarify or amend the unit did not preclude PERB from modifying the unit to include summer school and hourly employees. The petitioning union did not violate the agreement because it did not attempt to alter the unit, but filed a petition for recognition of the employees. PERB, exercising its statutory powers to determine appropriate units, treated the recognition request as a modification petition. Parties cannot contract away PERB's statutory jurisdiction; pp. 4-6.

605.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; OTHER PER SE VIOLATIONS
605.01000 – Outright Refusal to Bargain

District violated EERA section 3543.5(c) and, concurrently (a) and (b) by refusing to bargain with the exclusive representative as a tactical maneuver to challenge the validity of PERB's decision to modify the unit; p. 11.

608.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES
608.13000 – Sunshining Obligation

Violation of 3543.5(c) established notwithstanding that the exclusive representative did not present bargaining proposals and did not proceed through the public notice process. It was sufficient that it made a demand to bargain and the District expressed refusal to do so. The EERA does not require futile acts, in these circumstances, of making proposals and sunshining them; p. 13.