Decision 3017E – Chino Valley Unified School District
LA-CE-6828-E
Decision Date: April 20, 2026
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Associated Chino Teachers (ACT) filed an unfair practice charge alleging that Chino Valley Unified School District violated the Educational Employment Relations Act when it (1) issued new regulations prohibiting most displays of flags in a manner that could reasonably be interpreted to prohibit EERA-protected activities, (2) unilaterally adopted those regulations without affording ACT adequate advance notice and an opportunity to bargain, (3) unilaterally adopted policies and regulations requiring employees to notify parents or guardians of student requests to change their gender identity, and (4) unilaterally replaced the parental notification policy with a revised policy and regulation. After a formal hearing, an Administrative Law Judge issued a proposed decision finding that the District’s flag display policy interfered with protected rights under EERA, and that the District violated EERA when it unilaterally adopted that policy. The proposed decision further found that the District violated EERA when it unilaterally adopted the student gender identity parental notification policy, and when it adopted some portions of the revised policy and regulation. The District filed exceptions challenging the interference finding as to the flag display policy, and the proposed decision’s reliance on the Board’s decision in Rocklin Unified School District (2025) PERB Decision No. 2939.
Disposition: In a precedential decision, the Board found that the proposed decision did not err by finding that the District’s flag display policy interfered with employee rights to display union insignia and ACT’s right of reasonable access to District facilities to communicate with employees. The Board further found that the proposed decision did not err in relying on the Board’s precedential decision in Rocklin Unified School District (2025) PERB Decision No. 2939.
Perc Vol: 50
Perc Index: 152
Decision Headnotes
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
California’s public sector employees, like private sector employees, have a right to display union insignia in the workplace, absent an employer’s proof of “special circumstances” justifying a prohibition. (p. 18.)
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
In contrast to solicitation and distribution of literature, display of union insignia does not inherently involve an interruption from work. Therefore, employees’ presumptive right to display union insignia is not limited to non-working time or to non-work areas. (p. 19.)
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
Employees’ presumptive right to wear union buttons attaches in instructional settings. (p. 19.)
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
The mere possibility of disruption is not sufficient to establish a special circumstance justifying a prohibition on displaying union insignia in a classroom. Instead, the employer must make a concrete, fact-based showing of special circumstances justifying a narrowly tailored restriction on any display of union insignia. (pp. 19-20.)
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
School district’s ban on the display of “flags,” broadly defined, encompassed union insignia. (p. 22.)
401.07000 – Display of Union Insignia
Irrespective of enforcement, a rule that bans a category of conduct that could include protected activity as well as unprotected activity is unlawful because of this tendency to chill protected activity. A school district’s ban on the display of “flags,” broadly defined, encompassed union insignia and was therefore presumptively unlawful. The district failed to make a concrete, fact-based evidentiary showing justifying the policy’s restriction on union insignia. (pp. 20-24.)
401.04000 – Access – Union Right
School district’s ban on the display of “flags,” broadly defined, encompassed union insignia and thus interfered with union’s right to communicate with employees with posters, fliers, newsletters, or other graphic or printed materials containing union insignia. (pp. 24-25.)
1107.05000 – Precedential Authority of PERB Decisions
Under PERB Regulation 32320(c), all decisions and orders issued by the Board itself are precedential and may be cited in any matter pending before a Board agent or the Board itself, unless they are expressly designated otherwise.
1107.05000 – Precedential Authority of PERB Decisions
A precedential Board decision remains precedential pending judicial review. (p. 27.)
1000.02002 – Access – Subject of Bargaining
School district’s ban on the display of “flags,” broadly defined, affected exclusive representative’s ability to communicate with bargaining unit members on non-working time and in non-work areas and was thus negotiable. (p. 29.)
1000.02163 – Work Rules
School district’s ban on the display of “flags,” broadly defined, was a dress code in certain applications, and thus negotiable. (p. 29.)