Decision 1388S – State of California (Department of Corrections)
Decision Date: May 25, 2000
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Perc Vol: 24
Perc Index: 31107
601.03000 – Decision vs Effects Bargaining
Even when an employer has no obligation to negotiate about a particular decision, the Dills Act obligates the employer to meet and confer over all reasonably foreseeable effects of that decision to the extent that they impact the terms and conditions of employment. Reduced supervision that effected discipline and promotional opportunities was negotiable impact of reorganization. Placing correctional officers into defacto supervisory roles is negotiable effect, possible conflicting supervisory orders, diminished training opportunities, insufficient contract with supervisors.
601.04000 – When Duty Arises/Sufficiency of Bargaining Demand
In the event an employer is unsure whether or not a particular subject is negotiable, it is under an obligation to ask the union for its negotiability justification. The very essence of the duty to negotiate in good faith is the effort to reach agreement. A refusal to address proposals which are unclear is inconsistent with the statutory obligation. Such an obligation existed in the present case, where the reorganization altered the supervisory structure of the institution, and affected the level of supervision for bargaining unit members.
604.01000 – In General
An employer cannot simply refuse to provide information or ignore a request. Here the Department failed to provide the requested material in a timely manner. Board found as unpersuasive the Department's defense that such information packages had not been completed by the reorganization's implementation date, and that it gave the Association the requested material as soon as it was developed.
604.03000 – Form of Information Provided; Costs
In order to implement its reorganization plan, the Department had to have some interim plans regarding changes in staffing. Although the Department did not need to furnish information in a form more organized than its own records, it should have provided whatever interim information it had to the Association. Its failure to do so violated the Dills Act.
608.01000 – In General
The Department's decision to reorganize was outside the scope of representation.
1000.02164 – Other
Employer's decision to reorganize is outside the scope of bargaining. However, employer obligated to meet and confer over all reasonable foreseeable effects of the decision to extent they effect terms and conditions of employment.
1107.02000 – Weight Given to ALJ’s Proposed Decision: Findings, Conclusions, Credibility Resolutions
Board grants great deference to ALJ's credibility determinations and absent evidence to overturn such determinations defers to to ALJ's findings.