Decision A415M – City and County of San Francisco

SF-IM-140-M; SF-IM-141-M

Decision Date: August 19, 2014

Decision Type: Administrative Appeal

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 39
Perc Index: 28

Decision Headnotes

104.00000 – PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; STATUTORY AUTHORITY OF BOARD
104.01000 – Authority of Board In General; Validity and Application of Regulations (See also 102.01)

The Board stated that the issue of whether the former redevelopment agency of the City and County was a joint employer was best determined through unfair practice proceedings when the same factual and legal issues were also raised in an unfair practice charge pending investigation. PERB has the authority under MMBA section 3505.4 to determine whether factfinding applies to the particular dispute in which the request for factfinding arises. In the course of responding to a factfinding request the Board has jurisdiction to decide all factual and legal issues pertinent to the request, even if some of those issues are also pending in an unfair practice case. In this case, however, it was unnecessary for the Board to resolve the overlapping legal and factual issues to determine that a request for factfinding was sufficient.

900.00000 – IMPASSE PROCEDURES; IN GENERAL; DUTY TO PARTICIPATE IN GOOD FAITH
900.05000 – Post-Impasse

PERB has the authority under MMBA section 3505.4 to determine whether factfinding applies to the particular dispute in which the request for factfinding arises. In the course of responding to a factfinding request the Board has jurisdiction to decide all factual and legal issues pertinent to the request, even if those issues are also raised in an unfair practice case. In this case, it was unnecessary for the Board to resolve the overlapping legal and factual issues to determine that a request for factfinding was sufficient.