Decision 2308M – City of Santa Rosa
Decision Date: March 8, 2013
Decision Type: PERB Decision
601.04000 – When Duty Arises/Sufficiency of Bargaining Demand
Unilateral impositions after the completion of impasse procedures do not impose a collective bargaining agreement with a duration clause limiting negotiations for a specified period. The employer’s request to the union to convene negotiations following implementation of a last, best and final offer does not demonstrate bad faith bargaining.
900.05000 – Post-Impasse
Unilateral impositions after the completion of impasse procedures do not impose a collective bargaining agreement with a duration clause limiting negotiations for a specified period.
1407.02000 – Amendments to Statute
The California Legislature’s 2000 amendment to the MMBA embodied in AB 1852 did not create an exception to the rule that an imposition does not establish a set duration for imposed terms and conditions of employment. The legislative history of AB 1852 contains nothing to support the claim that there is a one-year hiatus on the union’s duty to bargain. The legislative intent was to declare that the employer’s post-impasse imposition does not establish an MOU and therefore does not extinguish the right of the employee organization to negotiate prior to the adoption of the agency’s annual budget, or "as otherwise required by law." (MMBA section 3505.4.) The amended statute is thus a sword enabling the union to assert bargaining rights after imposition. It is not a shield protecting the union from legitimate demands to bargain from the employer.