Decision 1371E – Wilmar Union Elementary School District
SF-CE-1918
Decision Date: February 9, 2000
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: District appealed ALJ’s proposed decision which found that District had violated EERA when it requested the removal of a union political sign from the school parking lot.
Disposition: Reversed. Board dismissed unfair practice charge and complaint; District had not Interfered with the right of employees to participate in the activities of the union, and had not interfered with union’s right of access and right to represent employees.
Perc Vol: 24
Perc Index: 31053
Decision Headnotes
101.02000 – Conflicts Between PERB-Administered Laws and Other California Statutes; Education Code/Supersession; MMBA Supersession
While PERB may not enforce the Education Code, the Board may interpret the Education Code to carry out its duty to administer EERA. When allegedly unlawful conduct arguably implicates both Education Code section 7055 and EERA, the Board may determine whether the action constitutes an unfair practice; p. 13. PERB is charged with the exclusive initial jurisdiction to consider the alleged unfair practice while harmonizing the purposes of EERA with those of the Education Code provisions and constitutional precedent. The mere fact that constitutional rights may be implicated or have sure bearing on this dispute is not in and of itself sufficient to divest PERB of jurisdiction. Those include the EERA purpose of promoting improved employer-employee relations in California schools through a system of collective bargaining (EERA sec. 3540), and the Education Code purpose of dissociating California schools from political controversy; Education Code sec. 7050 et seq; p. 14.
300.01000 – In General
The Board concluded that the display by an employee and the union of a large political campaign sign in the school parking lot was not EERA-protected conduct either as employee participation in an employee organization, or employee organization representation of employees; p. 18. Applying the Carlsbad analysis, the Board concludes that, by prohibiting Anderson and WTA from displaying the political campaign sign on school grounds, the District did not unlawfully interfere with Anderson's EERA-protected right to participate in an employee organization, or WTA's right to represent employees, and the allegations that it did so are dismissed; p. 23.
300.15000 – Speech
The campaign sign was not simply a communication between employees and their employee organization at the worksite; p. 17.