Decision 2017S – State of California (Department of Personnel Administration)
Decision Date: April 1, 2009
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The charge alleged the employer failed to provide information, engaged in surface bargaining when it implemented its last, best and final offer, and retaliated against union officers and unit members.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the partial dismissal finding some allegations where untimely filed and other allegations failed to state a prima facie case.
Perc Vol: 33
Perc Index: 68
604.05000 – Subjects of Information
Requests for a party's thought process do not demonstrate a prima facie case.
605.02000 – Insistence on Nonmandatory/Illegal Subjects (See also Scope of Representation, Sec 1000)
An employer may not unilaterally impose a waiver or limitation on a union's right to bargain.
608.08000 – Exhaustion of Impasse Procedures or Time Between Impasse and Mediation
Neither the Dills Act nor PERB regulations provides for a subsequent PERB administrative determination of impasse.
1101.01000 – In General
The allegation of bad faith bargaining was based entirely on conduct outside the six-month statute of limitations.
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling
The statute of limitations was not equitably tolled while the parties engaged in mandatory mediation.
1107.01000 – Exceptions; Responses to Exceptions; Standing; Extensions of Time/Late Filing/Waiver
On appeal, the union presents new allegations in support of its claim that the employer retaliated against the union's officers and members. The union makes no attempt to demonstrate why good cause exists to consider these allegations on appeal.
1503.02000 – Regulations Considered (By Number)
32635(b). On appeal, the union presents new allegations in support of its claim that the employer retaliated against the union's officers and members. The union makes no attempt to demonstrate why good cause exists to consider these allegations on appeal.