Decision 0481E – Eureka City School District

SF-CE-773

Decision Date: January 15, 1985

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 9
Perc Index: 16060

Decision Headnotes

1205.00000 – REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS
1205.07000 – Restoration of Status Quo

States quo ante already restored, so unnecessary to include in order.

1107.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD
1107.04000 – Unalleged Violations

Allegation properly entertained because fully litigated, related to subject matter of charge and opportunity to examine and be cross-examined.

1000.00000 – SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
1000.02147 – Transfer of Work Out of Unit

To prove unilateral transfer of work, charging party must prove that unit employees ceased to performed work which they had previously performed or that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, therefore, where duties traditionally overlapped, no unlawful transfer to work merely by increasing quantity performed by nonunit employees and decreasing quantity performed by unit employees.

1000.00000 – SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION
1000.02115 – Reduction in Hours/Workday/Worktime/Workyear

No negotiable transfer of work, but negotiable as reduction in hours.

608.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES
608.12000 – Good Faith; DeMinimus; Temporary Change

Offer to transfer to another site does not excuse unilateral reduction in hours.

608.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES
608.06000 – Management-Rights Clause; Management Prerogative

Subject not rendered non-negotiable merely because motivation that prompted unilateral action tied to managerial prerogative.

602.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION)
602.05000 – Impact and Extent

To prove unilateral transfer of work, charging party must prove that unit employees ceased to perform work which they had previously performed or that nonunit employees began to perform duties previously performed exclusively by unit employees, therefore, where duties traditionally overlapped, no unlawful transfer of work merely by increasing quantity performed by nonunit employees and decreasing quantity performed by unit employees.