Decision 2288M – City of Pinole

Charge failed to allege facts showing that the employer either ignored or responded with deliberately misleading information to any specific request for information.

Fact that employer presented proposals based upon a document prepared by a joint working group of local government managers does not indicate that the employer lacked a general desire to reach agreement or intent to subvert the negotiating process.

Fact that employer presented proposals based upon a document prepared by a joint working group of local government managers does not indicate that the employer lacked a general desire to reach agreement or intent to subvert the negotiating process.

Fact that employer presented proposals based upon a document prepared by a joint working group of local government managers does not indicate that the employer lacked a general desire to reach agreement or intent to subvert the negotiating process.

While charge alleged change in past practice of allowing employees to attend city council meetings while on duty, charge failed to allege facts establishing alleged change in policy concerned a matter within the scope of representation.

It is well established that an employer may not insist to impasse upon a waiver of statutory rights. Allegations that pension proposal amounted to a waiver of statutorily-prescribed maximum employee pension contributions are sufficient to support a viable theory of law so as to warrant issuance of a complaint.

Employer lawfully implemented its last, best and final offer retroactively. The fact that the parties continued to negotiate over proposals does not preclude employer, upon having bargained to impasse in good faith, from implementing the terms of its last, best and final offer retroactively as presented during negotiations.

It is well established that an employer may not insist to impasse upon a waiver of statutory rights. Allegations that pension proposal amounted to a waiver of statutorily-prescribed maximum employee pension contributions are sufficient to support a viable theory of law so as to warrant issuance of a complaint.

Charge failed to allege facts establishing change in policy of allowing employees to attend city council meetings while on duty, concerned a matter within the scope of representation. No facts alleged that on-duty attendance at such meetings related in any way to the job duties or working conditions of firefighters.

Charge failed to allege facts establishing change in policy of allowing employees to attend city council meetings while on duty, concerned a matter within the scope of representation. No facts alleged that on-duty attendance at such meetings related in any way to the job duties or working conditions of firefighters.

It is well established that an employer may not insist to impasse upon a waiver of statutory rights. Allegations that pension proposal amounted to a waiver of statutorily-prescribed maximum employee pension contributions are sufficient to support a viable theory of law so as to warrant issuance of a complaint.

Charge failed to allege facts establishing change in policy of allowing employees to attend city council meetings while on duty, concerned a matter within the scope of representation. No facts alleged that on-duty attendance at such meetings related in any way to the job duties or working conditions of firefighters.

In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been committed, but the Board’s regulations do not “empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge.” (Eastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466 (Eastside); PERB Regs. 32620 and 32640.) Pursuant to Eastside, a complaint may be issued to test viable competing theories of law. Although the Board’s role ordinarily is to resolve disputed questions of law, under the unique setting of this case, where there is no guiding PERB precedent and the legal issues involved are technical and complex pension laws outside PERB’s normal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to remand matter for issuance of complaint so that the issues may be decided upon a full evidentiary record.

In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been committed, but the Board’s regulations do not “empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge.” (Eastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466 (Eastside); PERB Regs. 32620 and 32640.) Pursuant to Eastside, a complaint may be issued to test viable competing theories of law. Although the Board’s role ordinarily is to resolve disputed questions of law, under the unique setting of this case, where there is no guiding PERB precedent and the legal issues involved are technical and complex pension laws outside PERB’s normal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to remand matter for issuance of complaint so that the issues may be decided upon a full evidentiary record.

In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been committed, but the Board’s regulations do not “empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge.” (Eastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466 (Eastside); PERB Regs. 32620 and 32640.) Pursuant to Eastside, a complaint may be issued to test viable competing theories of law. Although the Board’s role ordinarily is to resolve disputed questions of law, under the unique setting of this case, where there is no guiding PERB precedent and the legal issues involved are technical and complex pension laws outside PERB’s normal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to remand matter for issuance of complaint so that the issues may be decided upon a full evidentiary record.

In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been committed, but the Board’s regulations do not “empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge.” (Eastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466 (Eastside); PERB Regs. 32620 and 32640.) Pursuant to Eastside, a complaint may be issued to test viable competing theories of law. Although the Board’s role ordinarily is to resolve disputed questions of law, under the unique setting of this case, where there is no guiding PERB precedent and the legal issues involved are technical and complex pension laws outside PERB’s normal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to remand matter for issuance of complaint so that the issues may be decided upon a full evidentiary record.