Decision 0353H – Regents of the University of California

SF-CE-80-H

Decision Date: October 27, 1983

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 7
Perc Index: 14280

Decision Headnotes

1000.00000 – SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
1000.02019 – Classification of Employees

Reclassification of gardeners and of food service workers within scope of representation.

1000.00000 – SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
1000.02113 – Reclassification of Positions

Reclassification of gardeners and of food service workers and elimination of pay differentials in scope.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.04000 – Amendments

Elimination of pay differential is not continuing violation.

400.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE WITH, RESTRAINT, OR COERCION OF EMPLOYEES
400.01000 – In General; Standards

Employer's unilateral reclassification of gardeners during organizing effort of CSEA, which may have caused some employees to view union as impotent and unreliable, does not constitute harm to employee rights. Employee rights are not harmed because employer chose not to accept union proposal.

601.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000)
601.01000 – In General, Per Se and Totality of Conduct; Prima Facie Case

Nonexclusive representative and employees entitled to notice and opportunity to discuss elimination of pay differential for food workers. Employer's failure to provide either is violation of duty. Employer's good faith no defense to unilateral change complaint.

602.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION)
602.02000 – Prior Notice and Opportunity to Bargain

602.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION)
602.04000 – Time of Implementation

Elimination of pay differential is not continuing violation.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling

Equitable Tolling. Employee organizations efforts to upgrade gardener B classification in response to employers upgrade of gardener A to B does not put employer on notice to preserve evidence, hence does not toll statute of limitations on employers action with regard to gardener A. Tolling not obtained with cause of action is different. Pursuit of reclassification of gardener B is different that complaint of unilateral change is classificaiton of gardener A. But see UC-AFT Decision No. 826-H