Decision 0834E – Chula Vista City School District

Statements by school administrators regarding the progress of negotiations, including some statements which could be construed as putting the blame for salary situation on the association, were not threats of force or promise of benefit and therefore constituted protected free speech. Case contains thorough analysis of employer free speech defense; pp. 5-14.

Statements by school administrators regarding the progress of negotiations, including some statements which could be construed as putting the blame for salary situation on the association, constituted protected free speech. Case contains thorough analysis of employer free speech defense; pp. 5-14.

Statements by school administrators regarding the progress of negotiations, including some statements which could be construed as putting the blame for salary situation on the association, constituted protected free speech. Case contains thorough analysis of employer free speech defense; pp. 5-14.

Exclusive representative has right to grieve in its own name, take a grievance to arbitration without the involved employee's permission and file unit modification petitions but no right to be physically present at all grievance stages.

A proposal dealing with the composition of the bargaining unit is a nonmandatory subject of bargaining; pp. 38, 41.

Attorneys' and related cost are awarded only if party's case is without any arguable merit, frivolous, dilatory or pursued in bad faith. Mere fact that association belatedly withdrew or amended charges is insufficient to meet the standard; pp. 73-74.

Jefferson No. 133 and Healdsburg No. 375 hold that where an ambiguous proposal is arguably negotiable, a party must seek clarification of the proposals negotiability.

Party may bargain over a permissive and nonmandatory subject of bargaining without waiving the right thereafter to take the position the subject is nonmandatory.

Exclusive representative's right to file grievances in its own name is nonmandatory subject of bargaining; exclusive representative's right to take grievance to arbitration without consent of individual grievant is nonmandatory subject of bargaining; pp. 28, 35.

Exclusive representative's right to file grievances in its own name is nonmandatory subject of bargaining; p. 28.

Exclusive representative does not have right to be present at grievance meetings where employees do not seek representation by the representative - thus it is not nonmandatory subject of bargaining. Exclusive representative's right to file grievances in its own name is a statutory right and therefore nonmandatory subject of bargaining; pp. 23, 28. Exclusive representative's right to take a grievance to arbitration without the consent of the individual grievant is a statutory right and is therefore a nonmandatory subject of bargaining; pp. 33, 35.

District ordered to inform association about information available and provide information requested and bargain in good faith over costs if necessary. District ordered to accept and process grievances from Association and recognize association's right to seek unit modifications.

Issue of whether association can waive a statutory right is specifically not decided.

Party may bargain over a permissive and nonmandatory subject of bargaining without waiving the right thereafter to take the position the subject is nonmandatory.

General summary of the law regarding refusal to provide information; pp. 50-53. District's failure to respond to request is equivalent to a flat refusal. Unjustifiable delay equals flat refusal. Determination of whether information is relevant is made under "a liberal 'discovery-type standard'."

Fact that information may not have been conveniently available in a form that would accommodate both the interest of the association and the district does not automatically render association's request unduly burdensome nor relieve district of duty to provide it; p. 56. Employer may not simply present information in any form which it considers adequate but which is, nonetheless, unsuitable for informed consideration by the union; p. 56. Leave requests were not type of confidential employee records that would be exempt from disclosure. District could have accommodated association's need by deleting identifying information from request forms before giving it to association or by supplying information in form that would have made it equally useful to association; p. 55. Fact that district had only an inaccurate copy of contract requested by association did not excuse district's refusal to provide the Fact that district had only an inaccurate copy of contract requested by association did not excuse district's refusal to provide the information it sought; p. 69.

Leave requests were not type of confidential employee records that would be exempt from disclosure. District could have accommodated association's need by deleting identifying information from request forms before giving to association or supplying information in form that would have made it equally useful to association; p. 55.

Information pertaining to mandatory subjects of bargaining is presumptively relevant. Here, subject of "leave" is a mandatory subject of bargaining and association was therefore entitled to information sought; p. 54. Where association demands information concerning nonunit employees, bargaining representatives must demonstrate the "probable or potential relevance" of the information sought to its representation of unit employees. Here, association sought and was entitled to information regarding long-term substitutes; pp. 59-60. Association held entitled to information regarding health insurance; p. 67.

Insistence to impasse that employee organization waive right to grieve in own name held per se violation; p. 28. Objection to a nonmandatory proposal does not need to include any specific magic words. PERB must look to the history of bargaining, substance of the proposals, and the contents of the declarations of impasse to determine whether a party can be considered to have "insisted to impasse" on a particular proposal. Application of Anaheim test to grievance proposal unnecessary because district is not insisting to impasse on a term or condition of employment but rather that association waive a statutory right; pp. 22-23. Insistence to impasse that employee organization waive right to take grievances to arbitration without concurrence of named grievant held Insistence to impasse that employee organization waive right to take grievances to arbitration without concurrence of named grievant held language that provides that parties waive right to seek unit modification or clarification during the term of the contract held per se violation; p. 41. No per se violation found where parties bargain over nonmandatory subject of bargaining and party charging insistence to impasse fails to take firm position that proposal being bargained not be included in the contract; p. 44. While parties may engage in negotiations over nonmandatory subjects of bargaining, when one party subsequently decides to take position that nonmandatory proposal not be included in contract, that party must express opposition to further negotiation on proposal as prerequisite to charging other party with bargaining to impasse on nonmandatory subject. Here, association did put district on notice regarding its opposition to further neogitation on nonmandatory subjects of subject. Here, association did put district on notice regarding its opposition to further neogitation on nonmandatory subjects of

Where failure to provide information and insistence to impasse on nonmandatory subjects of bargaining are per se violations of 3543.5(c), same conduct does not justify conclusion that the district did not enter into negotiations with bona fide intent to reach agreement; p. 73.