Decision 2667P – San Diego Metropolitan Transit System

LA-PC-16-M

Decision Date: September 6, 2019

Decision Type: PERB Decision

Description:  Petitioner sought to represent certain maintenance employees of the San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, petitioning to sever those classifications from the existing general bargaining unit.  The employer appealed a hearing officer’s conclusion that the petitioned-for employees were skilled craft workers and comprised an appropriate multi-craft unit, and requested that PERB reverse the proposed order directing a representation election.

Disposition:  The Board reversed the proposed decision, denying the petition for severance and representation of a separate craft unit.  Though the petitioned-for employees were skilled craft workers, the Board held that severance of the existing bargaining unit was not appropriate.

View Full Text (PDF)

Decision Headnotes

101.00000 – PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; APPLICABILITY OF AND CONFLICTS WITH OTHER STATUTES
101.03000 – NLRA/LMRDA Precedent

The Public Utilities Code’s transit district enabling acts generally grant SMCS jurisdiction to resolve questions concerning representation (QCR), including determinations of appropriate bargaining units. (p. 17.) Under PERB Regulation 93080, when deciding transit district representation cases, the Board shall apply relevant federal law and administrative practice developed under the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, as amended. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law under the LMRA unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1105.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; EVIDENCE
1105.03000 – Burden of Proof; Weight of Evidence; Presumptions and Inferences; Affirmative Defenses

PERB Regulation 93040, governing hearings before SMCS, does not prohibit consideration of hearsay evidence. SMCS and the Board may thus consider hearsay evidence while taking into account its hearsay nature when determining how much evidentiary weight to give it. (p. 30, fn. 21.)

1105.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; EVIDENCE
1105.06000 – Hearsay

PERB Regulation 93040, governing hearings before SMCS, does not prohibit consideration of hearsay evidence. SMCS and the Board may thus consider hearsay evidence while taking into account its hearsay nature when determining how much evidentiary weight to give it. (p. 30, fn. 21.)

1307.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR)
1307.01000 – In General/Definition

The transit district enabling acts generally grant SMCS jurisdiction to resolve questions concerning representation (QCR), including determinations of appropriate bargaining units. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.01000 – In General

In craft unit severance cases, the history of collective bargaining of the employees at issue and the employer as a whole must be examined, “with emphasis on whether the existing patterns of bargaining are productive of stability in labor relations, and whether such stability will be unduly disrupted by the destruction of the existing patterns of representation.” (p. 26.) A recent change in the bargaining representative does not necessarily destabilize the existing relationship between the bargaining unit and employer. There must be some showing that the decertification resulted not from general dissatisfaction with the incumbent union, but from dissatisfaction among the skilled craft employees specifically. (p. 27.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.01000 – In General

Inadequate representation of the group seeking severance is unlikely to be found where employees in the proposed unit have participated in internal union affairs and in contract negotiations as part of the existing unit. (p. 28.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.01000 – In General

Employee preference alone is not sufficient to justify severance of a separate bargaining unit. PERB must determine based on the totality of the evidence presented at the hearing whether severance of the requested unit is appropriate. (pp. 33-34.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The transit district enabling acts generally grant SMCS jurisdiction to resolve questions concerning representation (QCR), including determinations of appropriate bargaining units. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

A unit of skilled craft workers may be severed from an existing represented unit in California’s public transit district systems. The question is whether the proposed bargaining unit is an appropriate skilled craft unit. (p. 18.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

Under federal law, and thus in transit district cases, the determination of whether a group of skilled craft workers should be severed from an existing bargaining unit is guided by balancing competing interests: (1) those in maintaining industrial stability and system-wide bargaining units against (2) employees’ opportunity to break away from a historical unit by a vote for separate representation. (p. 21.) The goal is to ensure that craft employees’ interests do not predominate without affording a voice in the decision to other unit employees, whose collective strength is weakened by a successful severance. (Ibid.) Thus, the party seeking severance must meet a heavy burden. (Id.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

In transit district cases, PERB will consider the following factors drawn from federal law to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether craft severance is appropriate: (1) the character of the proposed unit, specifically whether it consists of a distinct and homogenous group of skilled journeymen craftsmen; (2) the history of collective bargaining between the employees at issue and the employer as a whole; (3) whether the petitioned-for employees have maintained a separate identity within the larger existing unit; (4) the history and pattern of collective bargaining in the industry involved; and (5) the degree to which the skilled craft workers are part of an integrated production process. (pp. 21-22.) Each of the factors is considered in concert with PERB’s preference for system-wide bargaining units in PUC transit districts. (p. 23.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The first craft severance factor in transit district cases traditionally examines whether the proposed unit consists of “a distinct and homogenous group” of skilled journeymen craftsmen. Though they are not a distinct and homogenous group, given the preference in California’s public sector for multi-craft bargaining units, the inclusion of three distinct craft groups in a proposed unit does not bar severance. (pp. 25-26.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The second craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the parties’ bargaining history, with emphasis on whether the existing history has produced stable labor relations, and whether such stability will be unduly disrupted by severance. This factor is given substantial weight. (p. 26.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

A recent change in the bargaining representative does not necessarily destabilize the existing relationship between the bargaining unit and employer. There must be some showing that the decertification resulted not from a generalized dissatisfaction with the incumbent union, but from dissatisfaction among the skilled craft employees specifically. (p. 27.) The evidence did not show that the incumbent unions failed to adequately represent the petitioned-for employees’ interests—both advocated for their interests in bargaining sessions. And the failure to achieve a bargaining goal on behalf of certain employees does not mean the union failed to adequately represent them. (pp. 27-28.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

Inadequate representation of the group seeking severance is unlikely to be found where employees in the proposed unit have participated in internal union affairs and in contract negotiations as part of the existing unit. (p. 28.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The third craft severance factor in transit district cases examines whether the severance-seeking group has maintained a separate identity within the larger unit, and the extent of their participation in establishing and maintaining existing representational structure. This includes consideration of the similarity of terms and conditions of employment between the proposed and existing units, as well as any transfers or interchange between those units’ positions. (p. 29.) The participation of petitioned-for employees in general unit representation matters indicates they have not sought to maintain a separate identity, though this conclusion may be inconclusive where there is an absence of interchange between the classifications and they share similar and dissimilar terms and conditions of employment. (p. 30.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The fourth craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the history and pattern of collective bargaining in the industry involved. (p. 30.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

The fifth craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the degree to which the skilled craft workers are part of an integrated production process. (p. 31.) Considerations include whether the skilled craft workers work primarily in production areas or in separate shops, whether the production process is functionally dependent upon the work performed by the skilled craft workers, and whether a work stoppage among employees in the proposed unit would have a substantial impact on the operations of the other parts of the system. (Ibid.) Consistent with PERB’s preference for system-wide bargaining units in transportation systems, the evidence demonstrated functional dependence where the petitioned-for classifications perform duties integral to the provision of safe, reliable public transit services. (pp. 32-33.)

1308.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; SEVERANCE
1308.02000 – Severance (Transit District Units)

Employee preference alone is not sufficient to justify severance of a separate bargaining unit. PERB must determine based on the totality of the evidence presented at the hearing whether severance of the requested unit is appropriate. (pp. 33-34.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.01000 – In General/Definition of Appropriate Unit

Employee preference alone is not sufficient to justify severance of a separate bargaining unit. PERB must determine based on the totality of the evidence presented at the hearing whether severance of the requested unit is appropriate. (pp. 33-34.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.02000 – Bargaining/Representation History

In craft unit severance cases, the history of collective bargaining of the employees at issue and the employer as a whole must be examined, “with emphasis on whether the existing patterns of bargaining are productive of stability in labor relations, and whether such stability will be unduly disrupted by the destruction of the existing patterns of representation.” (p. 26.) A recent change in the bargaining representative does not necessarily destabilize the existing relationship between the bargaining unit and employer. There must be some showing that the decertification resulted not from general dissatisfaction with the incumbent union, but from dissatisfaction among the skilled craft employees specifically. (p. 27.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.02000 – Bargaining/Representation History

Inadequate representation of the group seeking severance is unlikely to be found where employees in the proposed unit have participated in internal union affairs and in contract negotiations as part of the existing unit. (p. 28.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.06000 – Extent of Organization

Employee preference alone is not sufficient to justify severance of a separate bargaining unit. PERB must determine based on the totality of the evidence presented at the hearing whether severance of the requested unit is appropriate. (pp. 33-34.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

A unit of skilled craft workers may be severed from an existing represented unit in California’s public transit district systems. The question is whether the proposed bargaining unit is an appropriate skilled craft unit. (p. 18.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

A skilled craft unit consists of a distinct and homogeneous group of skilled journeymen craftsmen, who, together with helpers or apprentices, are primarily engaged in the performance of tasks which are not performed by other employees and which require the use of substantial craft skills and specialized tools and equipment. To be a “journeyman craftsman” an individual must have a kind and degree of skill which is normally acquired only by undergoing a substantial period of apprenticeship or comparable training. (p. 19.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

PERB traditionally takes a narrow view of “skilled crafts” under certain statutes it administers based on statutory language defining “skilled crafts employees” as including, but not necessarily limited to, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, painters, and operating engineers. In cases arising under the transit acts, and in the absence of similar narrowing language in those enabling acts, PERB follows a broader definition of skilled craft workers under federal precedent. (p. 19, fn. 12.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

Transit district employees who, after completing certain apprenticeship programs, are assigned work according to their craft lines that no other employee classification outside their craft performs, and who do not receive cross-training between different crafts or with other general classifications, are skilled craft workers. (p. 20.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

Given the preference in California’s public sector for multi-craft bargaining units, the inclusion of three distinct craft groups in the proposed transit district unit does not bar severance or otherwise render it inappropriate, regardless of federal precedent favoring a “distinct and homogenous” unit of skilled journeymen craftsmen. (pp. 25-26.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.12000 – Skilled Crafts

A skilled craft unit may be inappropriate in a transit district depending on the degree to which those workers are part of an integrated production process. (p. 31.) Considerations include (1) whether the skilled craft workers work primarily in production areas or separate shops, (2) whether the production process is functionally dependent upon the skilled craft workers’ work, and (3) whether a work stoppage among employees in the proposed unit would substantially impact the operations of the other parts of the system. (Ibid.) Consistent with PERB’s preference for system-wide bargaining units in transportation systems, the evidence demonstrated functional dependence where the petitioned-for classifications perform duties integral to the provision of safe, reliable public transit services. (pp. 32-33.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The transit district enabling acts generally grant SMCS jurisdiction to resolve questions concerning representation (QCR), including determinations of appropriate bargaining units. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

A unit of skilled craft workers may be severed from an existing represented unit in California’s public transit district systems. The question is whether the proposed bargaining unit is an appropriate skilled craft unit. (p. 18.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

A skilled craft unit consists of a distinct and homogeneous group of skilled journeymen craftsmen, who, together with helpers or apprentices, are primarily engaged in the performance of tasks which are not performed by other employees and which require the use of substantial craft skills and specialized tools and equipment. To be a “journeyman craftsman” an individual must have a kind and degree of skill which is normally acquired only by undergoing a substantial period of apprenticeship or comparable training. (p. 19.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

PERB traditionally takes a narrow view of “skilled crafts” under certain statutes it administers based on statutory language defining “skilled crafts employees” as including, but not necessarily limited to, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, painters, and operating engineers. In cases arising under the transit acts, and in the absence of similar narrowing language in those enabling acts, PERB follows a broader definition of skilled craft workers under federal precedent. (p. 19, fn. 12.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

Transit district employees who, after completing certain apprenticeship programs, are assigned work according to their craft lines that no other employee classification outside their craft performs, and whom do not receive cross-training between different crafts or with other general classifications, are skilled craft workers. (p. 20.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

Under federal law, and thus in transit district cases, the determination of whether a group of skilled craft workers should be severed from an existing bargaining unit is guided by balancing competing interests: (1) those in maintaining industrial stability and system-wide bargaining units against (2) those in the opportunity to break away from a historical unit by a vote for separate representation. (p. 21.) The goal is to ensure that craft employees’ interests do not predominate without affording a voice in the decision to other unit employees, whose collective strength is weakened by a successful severance. (Ibid.) Thus, the party seeking severance must meet a heavy burden. (Id.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

In transit district cases, PERB will consider the following factors drawn from federal law to determine, on a case-by-case basis, whether craft severance is appropriate: (1) the character of the proposed unit, specifically whether it consists of a distinct and homogenous group of skilled journeymen craftsmen; (2) the history of collective bargaining between the employees at issue and the employer as a whole; (3) whether the petitioned-for employees have maintained a separate identity within the larger existing unit; (4) the history and pattern of collective bargaining in the industry involved; and (5) the degree to which the skilled craft workers are part of an integrated production process. (pp. 21-22.) Each of the federal factors is considered in concert with PERB’s preference for system-wide bargaining units in PUC transit districts. (p. 23.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The first craft severance factor in transit district cases traditionally examines whether the proposed unit consists of “a distinct and homogenous group” of skilled journeymen craftsmen. Though they are not a distinct and homogenous group, given the preference in California’s public sector for multi-craft bargaining units, the inclusion of three distinct craft groups in a proposed unit does not bar severance. (pp. 25-26.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The second craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the parties’ bargaining history, with emphasis on whether the existing history has produced stable labor relations, and whether such stability will be unduly disrupted by severance. This factor is given substantial weight. (p. 26.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

A recent change in the bargaining representative does not necessarily destabilize the existing relationship between the bargaining unit and employer. There must be some showing that the decertification resulted not from a generalized dissatisfaction with the incumbent union, but from dissatisfaction among the skilled craft employees specifically. (p. 27.) The evidence did not show that the incumbent unions failed to adequately represent the petitioned-for employees’ interests—both advocated for their interests in bargaining sessions. And the failure to achieve a bargaining goal on behalf of certain employees does not mean the union failed to adequately represent them. (pp. 27-28.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

Inadequate representation of the group seeking severance is unlikely to be found where employees in the proposed unit have participated in internal union affairs and in contract negotiations as part of the existing unit. (p. 28.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The third craft severance factor in transit district cases examines whether the severance-seeking group has maintained a separate identity within the larger unit, and the extent of their participation in establishing and maintaining existing representational structure. This includes consideration of the similarity of terms and conditions of employment between the proposed and existing units, as well as any transfers or interchange between those units’ positions. (p. 29.) The participation of petitioned-for employees in general unit representation matters indicates they’ve not sought to maintain a separate identity, though this conclusion may be inconclusive where there is an absence of interchange between the classifications and they share similar and dissimilar terms and conditions of employment. (p. 30.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The fourth craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the history and pattern of collective bargaining in the industry involved. (p. 30.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

The fifth craft severance factor in transit district cases examines the degree to which the skilled craft workers are part of an integrated production process. (p. 31.) Considerations include whether the skilled craft workers work primarily in production areas or in separate shops, whether the production process is functionally dependent upon the work performed by the skilled craft workers, and whether a work stoppage among employees in the proposed unit would have a substantial impact on the operations of the other parts of the system. (Ibid.) Consistent with PERB’s preference for system-wide bargaining units in transportation systems, the evidence demonstrated functional dependence where the petitioned-for classifications perform duties integral to the provision of safe, reliable public transit services. (pp. 32-33.)

1309.00000 – REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200)
1309.15000 – Transit District Units

Employee preference alone is not sufficient to justify severance of a separate bargaining unit. PERB must determine based on the totality of the evidence presented at the hearing whether severance of the requested unit is appropriate. (pp. 33-34.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.01000 – In General

Under PERB Regulation 93080, when deciding transit district representation cases under the Public Utilities Code, the Board shall apply the relevant federal law and administrative practice developed under the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, as amended. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.01000 – In General

Under PERB Regulation 93025, a determination by SMCS in a transit district representation case arising under the Public Utilities Code is appealable to the Board itself. (p. 17, fn. 9.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.01000 – In General

PERB Regulation 93040, governing hearings before SMCS, does not prohibit consideration of hearsay evidence. SMCS and the Board may thus consider hearsay evidence while taking into account its hearsay nature when determining how much evidentiary weight to give it. (p. 30, fn. 21.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.03000 – Regulations Considered (By Number) (Continued)

Under PERB Regulation 93080, when deciding transit district representation cases under the Public Utilities Code, the Board shall apply the relevant federal law and administrative practice developed under the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, as amended. (p. 17.) In doing so, the Board shall apply federal law unless (1) the question presented is governed by an explicit provision of the applicable transit district act, or (2) considerations unique to public sector labor relations require deviation from federal law. (pp. 17-18.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.03000 – Regulations Considered (By Number) (Continued)

Under PERB Regulation 93025, a determination by SMCS in a transit district representation case arising under the Public Utilities Code is appealable to the Board itself. (p. 17, fn. 9.)

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.03000 – Regulations Considered (By Number) (Continued)

PERB Regulation 93040, governing hearings before SMCS, does not prohibit consideration of hearsay evidence. SMCS and the Board may thus consider hearsay evidence while taking into account its hearsay nature when determining how much evidentiary weight to give it. (p. 30, fn. 21.)