Decision 1914S – Service Employees International Union Local 1000, California State Employees Association (Burnett)

SA-CO-297-S

Decision Date: June 26, 2007

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 31
Perc Index: 118

Decision Headnotes

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case

A disagreement between the grievant and the union as to whether a grievance should proceed to arbitration does not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. Although the employee expressed great frustration with the union's failure to notify him about his arbitration request, the facts do not demonstrate that such conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. The employee’s allegations do not show that the union engaged in arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith conduct in processing the employee’s arbitration request. Under the Dills Act an exclusive representative has the exclusive right to represent employees before the employer in matters involving contract negotiations, administration of the contract and grievance handling. Since the union has the exclusive authority to deal with the employer over these matters, the Dills Act imposes upon the exclusive representative a duty to fairly represent all bargaining unit members in these areas. An exclusive representative does not owe a duty of fair representation to unit members in a forum over which the union does not exclusively control the means to a particular remedy. Since PERB is a forum outside the contract, the union does not owe members a duty of fair representation in proceedings involving PERB. Thus, the union’s refusal to file an unfair practice charge with PERB on an employee’s behalf does not violate the duty of fair representation.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration

Although the employee expressed great frustration with the union's failure to notify him about his arbitration request, the facts do not demonstrate that such conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. A disagreement between the grievant and the union as to whether a grievance should proceed to arbitration does not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The employee’s allegations do not show that the union engaged in arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith conduct in processing the employee’s arbitration request.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.04000 – Scope of Duty; Internal Union Affairs

An exclusive representative does not owe a duty of fair representation to unit members in a forum over which the union does not exclusively control the means to a particular remedy. Since PERB is a forum outside the contract, the union does not owe members a duty of fair representation in proceedings involving PERB. Thus, the union’s refusal to file an unfair practice charge with PERB on an employee’s behalf does not violate the duty of fair representation.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.05000 – Mode or Adequacy of Representation/Advocacy

A disagreement between the grievant and the union as to whether a grievance should proceed to arbitration does not establish a breach of the duty of fair representation.) The employee’s allegations do not show that the union engaged in arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith conduct in processing the employee’s arbitration request. Although the employee expressed great frustration with the union's failure to notify him about his arbitration request, the facts do not demonstrate that such conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.06000 – Other

An exclusive representative does not owe a duty of fair representation to unit members in a forum over which the union does not exclusively control the means to a particular remedy. Since PERB is a forum outside the contract, the union does not owe members a duty of fair representation in proceedings involving PERB. Thus, the union’s refusal to file an unfair practice charge with PERB on an employee’s behalf does not violate the duty of fair representation.

805.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; CAUSING EMPLOYER TO VIOLATE ACT
805.01000 – In General

Individual employees lack standing to allege that the employee organization violated the rights of an employer. Therefore, the allegation that the union violated § 3519.5(a) is dismissed.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.03000 – Standing

Individual employees lack standing to allege that the employee organization violated the rights of an employer. Therefore, the allegation that the union violated § 3519.5(a) is dismissed.