Decision 1530S – California Correctional Peace Officers Association (Moore)
SF-CO-46-S
Decision Date: June 20, 2003
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The charge alleged that the union refused to bargain with Moore, a supervisor, allowed a supervisory employee to represent non‑supervisory employees, and threatened reprisals against the Moore for challenging the union’s conduct.
Disposition: The Board dismissed the charge. The charge alleged a violation of the Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees, not the Dills Act. PERB has no jurisdiction over the EERB and the charging party, as a supervisory employee, does not have standing to file the charge. A Union representative’s failure to discuss complaints about an employee with the employee does not state a prima facie violation of the Dills Act because the union’s duty to bargain is owed to the state, not to employees.
Perc Vol: 27
Perc Index: 90
Decision Headnotes
100.01000 – In General
A claim that a union allowing a supervisory employee who is the union chapter president unlawfully represents non-supervisory employees, alleges a violation of the Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees (EEBR) not the Dills Act. PERB does not have jurisdiction over the EEBR.
104.01000 – Authority of Board In General; Validity and Application of Regulations (See also 102.01)
A claim that a union allowing a supervisory employee who is the union chapter president unlawfully represents non-supervisory employees, alleges a violation of the Bill of Rights for State Excluded Employees (EEBR) not the Dills Act. PERB does not have jurisdiction over the EEBR.
200.04000 – Supervisors
Under the EEBR, a supervisory employee does not have standing to bring a charge with the Board on his own behalf alleging a threat of reprisal against him and his staff by a union chapter president. An exception to this rule might occur if the alleged conduct adversely impacts the rights of unit employees.
804.02000 – Refusal to Bargain in Good Faith (See, also, Scope of Representation, Sec. 1000)
A union chapter president’s failure to discuss complaints regarding a supervisor’s procedures on the job with the supervisor first before submitting the complaints to the Employee Relations Officer does not state a prima facie violation of the Dills Act because the union’s duty to bargain is owed to the State, not to individual employees.
1100.03000 – Standing
Under the EEBR, a supervisory employee does not have standing to bring a charge with the Board on his own behalf alleging a threat of reprisal against him and his staff by a union chapter president. An exception to this rule might occur if the alleged conduct adversely impacts the rights of unit employees.