| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I061M |
County of San Mateo
1207.02000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; Standards for Obtaining Injunctive Relief
PERB will exclude from its injunctive relief request to the court any positions that PERB has preliminarily found to be essential if the union agrees to exempt those positions from a planned strike. In some cases, the public may be sufficiently protected if the essential employees are on call, i.e., ready to cross the picket line if needed in the event of an emergency. (San Mateo Superior Court (2019) PERB Order No. IR-60-C, p 5, fn. 3.) A striking union need not use any particular format in notifying PERB, the employer, and the affected employees if the union decides to narrow the scope of its planned strike. (Id. at p. 7.) If a union exempts from a planned strike certain employees or positions that PERB has preliminarily found to be essential, such an exemption will normally mean that (1) there is no “reasonable cause” to believe that the union is threatening an unfair practice as to those positions, and (2) injunctive relief is not “just and proper” as to those positions. (Id., p. 5.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 17 | 06/27/19 |
| I061M |
County of San Mateo
1207.02000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; Standards for Obtaining Injunctive Relief
An employer asking for extraordinary injunctive relief is required to provide PERB with detailed information, documenting the available non-striking supervisors and managers and to what extent they are able to cover for striking workers, as well as contacting outside companies and agencies and documenting their responses. This level of detail allows an employer to demonstrate clearly the extent of remaining need after accounting for all coverage options. In strikes of short duration, PERB will also consider holiday and weekend staffing levels and the extent to which the employer can lessen a strike’s impacts by authorizing weekday and weekend overtime work before and after the strike, or offering evening or weekend services before and/or after a scheduled strike. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 17 | 06/27/19 |
| I061M |
County of San Mateo
1207.03000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; INJUNCTIVE RELIEF; Board Proceedings in Court
PERB will exclude from its injunctive relief request to the court any positions that PERB has preliminarily found to be essential if the union agrees to exempt those positions from a planned strike. In some cases, the public may be sufficiently protected if the essential employees are on call, i.e., ready to cross the picket line if needed in the event of an emergency. (San Mateo Superior Court (2019) PERB Order No. IR-60-C, p 5, fn. 3.) A striking union need not use any particular format in notifying PERB, the employer, and the affected employees if the union decides to narrow the scope of its planned strike. (Id. at p. 7.) If a union exempts from a planned strike certain employees or positions that PERB has preliminarily found to be essential, such an exemption will normally mean that (1) there is no “reasonable cause” to believe that the union is threatening an unfair practice as to those positions, and (2) injunctive relief is not “just and proper” as to those positions. (Id., p. 5.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 17 | 06/27/19 |
| 2655M |
Rosamond Community Services District
1107.15000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD; Withdrawal of Appeal; Request that Decision be Vacated
As part of the Board’s authority to take any action in a pending case that the Board deems necessary to discharge its duties and effectuate the purposes of the labor relations laws that PERB enforces, the Board has discretion to grant or deny requests to withdraw and dismiss cases pending before the Board itself. (EERA, § 3541.3, subds. (i) and (n); MMBA, § 3509, subd. (a); City of Santa Rosa (Fire Department) (2019) PERB Decision No. 2653-M, p. 2.) Board found withdrawal of the District’s exceptions and parties’ joint request that no further action be taken in the case pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties to be consistent with the MMBA’s purpose of promoting harmonious labor relations and granted requests. Matter closed and compliance deemed complete. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 25 | 07/10/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1309.15000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); PUC Transit District Units
The transit district enabling acts generally grant employees the right to form bargaining units appropriate for collective bargaining and authorize SMCS to resolve disputes over questions concerning representation (QCR) or whether a particular unit is appropriate. (PERB Reg. 3005 [distinguishing petitions for certification or decertification, which involve a QCR, from those for clarification, in which there is no QCR].) A QCR arises when there is a legitimate doubt whether the union has majority support in the bargaining unit. (NLRB v. Financial Inst. Employees of Am., Local 1182 (1986) 475 U.S. 192, 198.) If a QCR exists, a union must demonstrate majority support among employees to be added to an existing unit. (Teamsters Nat. United Parcel Service Neg. Cmte. v. NLRB (D.C. Cir. 1994) 17 F.3d 1518, 1524.) In contrast, accretion allows employees to be added to an existing unit without an election or other demonstration of majority support. (IBEW Local 889 v. Aubry (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 861, 872.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1309.15000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); PUC Transit District Units
As in any case involving a unit determination, the Board examines the traditional community of interest factors to determine whether the proposed transit unit is appropriate. These include: bargaining history; desires of the affected employees; nature of the employer’s business; similarity in scale and manner of determining earnings; similarity in employment benefits, hours of work, and other terms and conditions of employment; similarity in the kind of work performed; similarity in the qualifications, skills, and training of the affected employees; frequency of contact or interchange among the employees; geographical proximity; continuity or integration of production processes; common supervision and determination of labor-relations policy; and relationship to the employer’s administrative organization, as well as the employer’s authority to bargain effectively at the level of the unit and the effect of a unit on the efficient operation of the public service. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1309.15000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); PUC Transit District Units
System-wide bargaining units “are favored” in California’s public sector in California’s public sector transit districts. (IBEW Local 889 v. Aubry (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 861, 871.) Adopting a contrary rule might result in unit proliferation and employee fragmentation that would impede the efficient service required of our public transportation systems. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1309.15000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); PUC Transit District Units
Community of interest is determined by the totality of circumstances. (Monterey Peninsula Community College District (1978) PERB Decision No. 76, p. 13.) In determining whether a community of interest exists, we do not “go[] down a check list” of these factors but rather ascertain whether employees share a substantial mutual interest in matters subject to meeting and negotiating. (Ibid.) County bus system is an integrated system. Community of interest determination flows from multiple general and specific facts, including geographic location, contact, interchange, work proximity, and overlapping skills and duties between classification union sought to accrete into existing unit and historically included classification. Moreover, classification sought to be accreted and historically included classification report to the same immediate supervisor and supervision chain, receive at least some of the same training, perform the same primary function of assisting passengers in navigating the transit system, work in outdoor weather conditions, wear uniforms and must be familiar with the bus routes. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.07000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PERB jurisdictions)
In cases not arising under the transit acts, PERB’s unit modification procedure is a proper mechanism by which to resolve disputes over unit placement at any time, even if there is a long history of the classification being excluded from the unit and even if the petitioning union previously agreed to such exclusion. (Regents of the University of California (2010) PERB Decision No. 2107-H, pp. 18-23 (Regents I); Hemet Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 820.) Under these cases and their progeny, (1) a union may seek to add unrepresented employees to a unit even if the employees were excluded at the time the unit was first determined, and/or the union clearly bargained for some benefit in exchange for their exclusion at some point, or otherwise waived their inclusion; and (2) a petitioning union must only establish a community of interest between the unrepresented employees to be added and the existing unit, plus proof of support from a majority of the employees to be added, if and only if the union proposes to increase the size of the unit by more than ten percent. (PERB Reg. 32781, subd. (e)(1).) PERB has declined to incorporate the “historical exclusion” rule from Union Electric Co. (1975) 217 NLRB 666 and Laconia Shoe Co. (1974) 215 NLRB 573, 576. (Regents I, supra, PERB Decision No. 2107-H, p. 22.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.07000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PERB jurisdictions)
PERB’s approach in non-transit cases involving accretion of unrepresented employees focuses on preventing the proliferation of bargaining units and fragmentation of employee groups, as well as finding an appropriate unit in which employees can realistically be represented. (Regents of the University of California (2017) PERB Order No. Ad-453-H, pp. 10-11, 23-24 [from its earliest days, PERB has sought to avoid fragmentation of employee groups and unnecessary proliferation of units]; (Regents of the University of California (2010) PERB Decision No. 2107-H, pp. 18-23; El Monte Union High School District (1982) PERB Decision No. 220, p. 10 [interest in preventing fragmentation or proliferation of units].) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.07000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PERB jurisdictions)
PERB has explicitly rejected applying the “overwhelming community of interest” standard to petitions to accrete unrepresented employees. (Regents of the University of California (2017) PERB Order No. Ad-453-H, p. 5; cf. Frontier Telephone of Rochester, Inc. (2005) 344 NLRB 1270, 1271.) Community of interest is determined by the totality of circumstances. (Monterey Peninsula Community College District (1978) PERB Decision No. 76, p. 13.) In determining whether a community of interest exists, we do not “go[] down a check list” of these factors but rather ascertain whether employees share a substantial mutual interest in matters subject to meeting and negotiating. (Ibid.) PERB has consistently declined to give significance in the community of interest analysis to differences in wages, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment that are primarily controlled by the employer and may be changed through collective bargaining. (Santa Clara County Office of Education (1990) PERB Decision No. 839, p. 2 and adopting proposed decision at p. 12.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
Under California public transit district law, accretions are restricted to a lesser degree than the National Labor Relations Act, but more so than under California’s non-transit public sector relations acts. The following factors must be considered when determining whether to accrete employees to an existing Public Utilities Code transit district bargaining unit: whether the new group of employees itself constitutes an appropriate unit; the size of the group to be accreted relative to the size of the existing unit; whether the group to be accreted was already in existence at the time the existing bargaining unit was recognized; the extent to which the existing unit is itself the result of prior accretions; and the views of the employees. Additionally, as in any case involving a unit determination, the Board examines the traditional community of interest factors to determine whether the proposed transit unit is appropriate. These include: bargaining history; desires of the affected employees; nature of the employer’s business; similarity in scale and manner of determining earnings; similarity in employment benefits, hours of work, and other terms and conditions of employment; similarity in the kind of work performed; similarity in the qualifications, skills, and training of the affected employees; frequency of contact or interchange among the employees; geographical proximity; continuity or integration of production processes; common supervision and determination of labor-relations policy; and relationship to the employer’s administrative organization, as well as “the employer’s authority to bargain effectively at the level of the unit and the effect of a unit on the efficient operation of the public service. While most of these factors are also relevant to one degree or another under federal law, California public transit district law does not restrict accretions to the same extent as does the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in applying federal law. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
The transit district enabling acts generally grant employees the right to form bargaining units appropriate for collective bargaining and authorize SMCS to resolve disputes over questions concerning representation (QCR) or whether a particular unit is appropriate. (PERB Reg. 3005 [distinguishing petitions for certification or decertification, which involve a QCR, from those for clarification, in which there is no QCR].) A QCR arises when there is a legitimate doubt whether the union has majority support in the bargaining unit. (NLRB v. Financial Inst. Employees of Am., Local 1182 (1986) 475 U.S. 192, 198.) If a QCR exists, a union must demonstrate majority support among employees to be added to an existing unit. (Teamsters Nat. United Parcel Service Neg. Cmte. v. NLRB (D.C. Cir. 1994) 17 F.3d 1518, 1524.) In contrast, accretion allows employees to be added to an existing unit without an election or other demonstration of majority support. (IBEW Local 889 v. Aubry (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 861, 872.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
System-wide bargaining units “are favored” in California’s public sector in California’s public sector transit districts. ((IBEW Local 889 v. Aubry (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 861, 871.) Adopting a contrary rule might result in unit proliferation and employee fragmentation that would impede the efficient service required of our public transportation systems. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
Under California public transit district law standard, the hearing officer erred in finding that the transit ambassador (TA) classification had been historically excluded from the unit. The TA classification did not exist at the time the unit was certified. The evidentiary record was insufficient for the Board to determine exactly when the TA classification came into existence relative to the effective date of the then-current agreement. There was no evidence that the union clearly and unmistakably waived its right to file a unit clarification petition with SMCS when TA unit placement was not resolved during bargaining. The evidence thus did not establish that the TA classification had been historically excluded from the unit under California transit law. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
PERB does not apply an “overwhelming community of interest standard” to a transit union’s attempt to accrete unrepresented employees into an existing unit. (Cf. Frontier Telephone of Rochester, Inc. (2005) 344 NLRB 1270, 1271.) Community of interest is determined by the totality of circumstances. (Monterey Peninsula Community College District (1978) PERB Decision No. 76, p. 13.) In determining whether a community of interest exists, we do not “go[] down a check list” of these factors but rather ascertain whether employees share a substantial mutual interest in matters subject to meeting and negotiating. (Ibid.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2650P |
San Joaquin Regional Transit District * * * PUC TRANSIT CASE. PERB CASE NUMBER CONTAINS INCORRECT LETTERING, AS CASE DID NOT ARISE UNDER MMBA * * *
1310.08000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PUC transit district units)
Accretion; adding classification(s) to existing unit (transit district units) Board found community of interest factors and factors unique to accretion of employees into an existing unit support adding transit ambassador (TA) classification to the existing bargaining unit. County bus system is an integrated system. Community of interest determination flows from multiple general and specific facts, including geographic location, contact, interchange, work proximity, and overlapping skills and duties between TA classification and historically included classification. In light of the preference for broad units in transit systems, Board concludes that TA classification shares a community of interest with employees in County transit district’s existing bargaining unit. The small size of proposed addition relative to existing unit favored accretion, as there was little concern that the accretion could create a QCR or otherwise disrupt the exclusive representative’s majority support within the unit. Further, the TAs would not constitute an appropriate unit in themselves. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 11 | 06/21/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
408.01000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO SELF OR UNION REPRESENTATION; WEINGARTEN RIGHTS; In General
A union has a right to sufficient information regarding alleged wrongdoing to enable a union representative to represent an employee in a meaningful manner during an investigatory interview, but the union does not obtain the right to an underlying written complaint until after the initial investigatory interview. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
408.03000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO SELF OR UNION REPRESENTATION; WEINGARTEN RIGHTS; Investigatory Interviews
A union has a right to sufficient information regarding alleged wrongdoing to enable a union representative to represent an employee in a meaningful manner during an investigatory interview, but the union does not obtain the right to an underlying written complaint until after the initial investigatory interview. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
604.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; In General
A union has a right to sufficient information regarding alleged wrongdoing to enable a union representative to represent an employee in a meaningful manner during an investigatory interview, but the union does not obtain the right to an underlying written complaint until after the initial investigatory interview. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
604.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; In General
A union is not required to show that it was harmed by an employer’s failure to use adequate care, diligence, or thoroughness in responding to an information request. Where union requested written student complaints of discrimination against two faculty members in advance of investigatory interviews, it was of no moment that employees were able to guess some aspects of the complaints against them, including the complainants’ identities. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
604.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; In General
There is no categorical rule denying a union access to information pertaining to a mandatory subject, even when the parties are not in bargaining and the union intends to use the information to advise or represent an employee in relation to an extra-contractual issue or forum. Because discipline is within the scope of representation, information pertaining to actual or potential discipline is presumptively relevant, even if the only contemplated disciplinary forum is extra-contractual. Information pertaining to actual or potential discipline is presumptively relevant, no matter in what forum the disciplinary matter might be resolved, as union has right to information necessary or relevant to its right to represent bargaining unit employees. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
604.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; In General
When a union is considering whether to exercise its right to represent employees in a meeting or proceeding that may adversely affect employment status, or the union does exercise that right, an employer may not deny the union’s related information request on the basis that the meeting or proceeding is extra-contractual or that the union has no duty of fair representation, as union has right to information necessary or relevant to its right to represent bargaining unit employees. Partially overrules San Bernardino City Unified School District (1998) PERB Decision No. 1270 and Carmichael Recreation & Park District (2008) PERB Decision No. 1953-M, to the extent they suggested a categorical rule denying unions access to information for extra-contractual fora. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2652E |
Contra Costa Community College District
604.04000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION; Confidentiality; Privacy
PERB applies traditional balancing test in all information request cases in which an employer raises a privacy or confidentiality defense. When faced with an employer’s privacy assertion in response to a union’s request for relevant information, PERB, like the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), uses a balancing test and places the burden on the employer to demonstrate that the privacy interest outweighs the union’s need for the information. (Los Angeles Unified School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2438, pp. 7-8; Detroit Edison Co. v. NLRB (1979) 440 U.S. 301, 318-320 (Detroit Edison).) Even if the employer meets this burden, the employer may not simply refuse to provide the information, but rather must meet and negotiate in good faith to seek an accommodation of all legitimate competing interests. Where an employer flatly refuses a union’s request, without meeting and conferring to seek an accommodation, normally that alone is a sufficient basis to find a violation, without engaging in the Detroit Edison balancing test. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 18 | 06/26/19 |
| 2648M |
City of Arcadia
409.06000: EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; DEFENSES; Free Speech
No violation found where manager, having been told by multiple people that Association attorney called him a liar, told a group of Association members that he had not lied and backed up his contention with a brief discussion of the timeline of events. more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 1 | 06/12/19 |
Notice Regarding Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) at PERB
For information about use of AI in PERB filings, see Atwater Elementary Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Garcia) (2025) PERB Decision No. 2995-E and our FAQ.
