| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2995E |
Atwater Elementary Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Garcia)
1205.04000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Attorneys Fees and Costs
To determine whether a claim, defense, motion, or other action is frivolous, the Board examines whether it is so manifestly erroneous that no prudent representative would have filed or maintained it. (Palomar Health, supra, PERB Decision No. 2895-M, p. 67.) To determine whether a party acted with subjective bad faith, we examine whether the party’s conduct was dilatory, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of process, and we may infer such intent from circumstantial evidence. (Ibid.) It is bad faith conduct if a party or representative fails to verify AI generated citations. more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 99 | 12/15/25 |
| 2995E |
Atwater Elementary Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Garcia)
1100.05000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Dismissal of Charge; Appeal
Extensive reliance on nonexistent PERB case law violates PERB Regulation 32635(a) and justifies striking a party’s appeal entirely. more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 99 | 12/15/25 |
| 2995E |
Atwater Elementary Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Garcia)
1205.04000: REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS; Attorneys Fees and Costs
The Board will consider issuing monetary sanctions in future cases where parties, including self represented parties, submit filings that include citations to nonexistent case law or unsupported legal principles. The Board has authority to issue monetary and non-monetary sanctions in such circumstances, including but not limited to awarding the opposing party or parties reasonable attorney fees for the time and resources spent responding to Garcia’s bad faith appeal. (Palomar Health (2024) PERB Decision No. 2895-M, p. 67 [sanctions proper if a party’s claim, defense, motion, or other action or tactic was without arguable merit and pursued in bad faith]; Los Rios Community College District and Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (2018) PERB Decision No. 2614, pp. 4-6 [discussing monetary and non-monetary litigation sanctions]; City of Alhambra (2009) PERB Decision No. 2037 M, pp. 2-4 [explaining basis for award of attorney fees and litigation costs]; see also, e.g., Gov. Code, § 11455.30(a).) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 99 | 12/15/25 |
| 2995E |
Atwater Elementary Teachers Association, CTA/NEA (Garcia)
1100.05000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Dismissal of Charge; Appeal
No charge, appeal, response, reply or any other filing before PERB should contain any citations or statements of law, whether provided by AI or any other source, which are fabricated. Inclusion of fabricated cases or statements of law, before any division of PERB, will warrant serious consequences, such as striking the filing from the record, dismissal of the charge, or monetary sanctions. more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 99 | 12/15/25 |
| 1169H |
Regents of the University of California (University Professional and Technical Employees)
602.05000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); New Policy or Application or Enforcement of Existing Policy in New Way
To determine whether a unilateral change has occurred, the charging party must establish that the employer altered the status quo by departing from the terms of the parties' contract or the established past practice; the status quo can encompass change as a normal part of the pattern of conduct between an employer and a union; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. |
20 | 27138 | 09/12/96 |
| 1169H |
Regents of the University of California (University Professional and Technical Employees)
602.04000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Change in or Deviation from Unwritten Past Practice
To determine whether a unilateral change has occurred, the charging party must establish that the employer altered the status quo by departing from the terms of the parties' contract or the established past practice; the status quo can encompass change as a normal part of the pattern of conduct between an employer and a union; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. |
20 | 27138 | 09/12/96 |
| 1078E |
San Jacinto Unified School District
602.05000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); New Policy or Application or Enforcement of Existing Policy in New Way
Change in work hours of maintenance employees assigned to work football games resulted in a change of hours as some employees who worked the District's new schedule lost income in the form of overtime compensation; p. 21, proposed dec. District did not carry its burden showing that it established either a new librarian technician or a health clerk position at an elementary school. Instead, the ALJ found that the District unilaterally changed the hours of the positions which were temporarily vacant; p. 28, proposed dec. The ALJ concluded that a reduction or other change in hours of a vacant position is a matter within the scope of bargaining inasmuch as it affects the "collective interests" of bargaining unit members. In this case, the net effect of the District's changes was an actual diminution of unit work; p. 28, proposed dec. more or view all topics or full text. |
19 | 26036 | 12/22/94 |
| 0955E |
Eureka City School District
602.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); In General
Once agreement is reached concerning a permissive subject and it is embodied in the collective bargaining agreement, the parties are bound by its terms until its expiration or unless modified by the parties; p. 18. more or view all topics or full text. |
16 | 23168 | 10/27/92 |
| 0911E |
Cloverdale Unified School District
1000.02064: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Hours of Work
District unilaterally modified fourth and fifth grade teachers' work day schedule by eliminating 45 minute preparation period, increasing teachers' instructional day by a corresponding 45 minutes, and adding two new subjects to the basic teaching assignment. "Employers are generally free to alter the instructional schedule without prior notification . . . ." Imperial Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 825; p. 16. However, when changes affect the length of the working day or existing duty-free time, the subject is negotiable . . . ." Imperial Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 825; p. 16. more or view all topics or full text. |
15 | 22179 | 11/20/91 |
| 0911E |
Cloverdale Unified School District
1000.02156: SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION; Workdays/Workyear
District unilaterally modified fourth and fifth grade teachers' work day schedule by eliminating 45 minute preparation period, increasing teachers' instructional day by a corresponding 45 minutes, and adding two new subjects to the basic teaching assignment. "Employers are generally free to alter the instructional schedule without prior notification . . . ." Imperial Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 825; p. 16. However, when changes affect the length of the working day or existing duty-free time, the subject is negotiable . . . ." Imperial Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 825; p. 16. more or view all topics or full text. |
15 | 22179 | 11/20/91 |
| 0884E |
Modesto City School District
1310.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; In General
Although the practical effect of modifying a unit under PERB Regulation 32781(b)(1) may be to transfer work out of the unit, it is not an unlawful transfer because it is done in accord with the process PERB requires the employer to observe; p. 11. [The Board's decisions in Regents of the University of California (California Nurses Association) (1989) PERB Decision No. 722-H and Mt. San Antonio Community College District (1983) PERB Decision No. 334] indicate the removal of work from a bargaining unit may lawfully occur as a collateral affect of a unit modification when PERB's statutory and regulatory procedures are followed; pp. 12-13. more or view all topics or full text. |
15 | 22099 | 06/03/91 |
| A530Ha |
Regents of the University of California
1107.10000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD; Request for Reconsideration
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2024) PERB Decision No. 2916a-T (LA Metro) precludes a party from requesting reconsideration of a Board decision where the determination under review was not based on a record created via an evidentiary hearing. (Id. at pp. 3-9.) The Board authorized PERB’s Appeals Office to dismiss future reconsideration requests that are inconsistent with LA Metro. (pp. 2-3 & fn. 2.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 64 | 08/29/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1310.07000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; Accretion, Adding classification(s) to existing unit (PERB jurisdictions)
Under PERB Regulations, a unit modification petitioner need not submit proof of support when it seeks to add classifications that would not increase the bargaining unit in question by 10 percent or more. (PERB Reg. 32781(e)(1); Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order No. Ad-527-H, p. 2, fn. 1.) However, as explained in Regents, supra, p. 9, there is an exception to this rule when a second union files a request for recognition or petition for certification for an appropriate unit that includes classifications at issue in the unit modification petition, and the second union provides sufficient proof of support. (PERB Reg. 32781(e)(2).) (pp. 4-6.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1310.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT MODIFICATION; In General
There are two competing interests in representation cases: stable and harmonious labor relations based on appropriate bargaining units, and employee free choice. (Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order No. Ad-527-H, p. 12 (Regents).) PERB balances these interests by prioritizing a petition that involves a question concerning representation over a conflicting petition that does not and PERB Regulation 32781(e)(2) therefore requires a unit modification petitioner to provide at least 30 percent proof of support when the titles at issue in its petition are also included in a “pending” request for recognition. A “pending” recognition request is one that is on file. (Id. at p. 14.) (p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1309.14000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; UNIT DETERMINATION/CRITERIA (SEE ALSO WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE?, SECTION 200); Splitting of Classifications
HEERA contains a presumption against splitting occupational groups, but no presumption against splitting classifications. Rather, HEERA requires PERB to consider the impact of dividing a classification. (Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order Ad-525-H, pp. 19-22.) PERB’s functional approach means that “keeping an occupational group together can lead to splitting a title or classification.” (Id. at p. 22.) Accordingly, petitioning union could amend its petition to include only Health Educators who serve patients at UC medical centers and exclude Health Educators who serve students and are included in a newly created “Student Services and Advising Professionals” unit represented by a different union. (pp. 13-14.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition
There are two competing interests in representation cases: stable and harmonious labor relations based on appropriate bargaining units, and employee free choice. (Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order No. Ad-527-H, p. 12 (Regents).) PERB balances these interests by prioritizing a petition that involves a question concerning representation over a conflicting petition that does not and PERB Regulation 32781(e)(2) therefore requires a unit modification petitioner to provide at least 30 percent proof of support when the titles at issue in its petition are also included in a “pending” request for recognition. A “pending” recognition request is one that is on file. (Id. at p. 14.) (p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1307.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION (QCR); In General/Definition
HEERA section 3574 states that the employer “shall” grant recognition absent any of the circumstances set forth in section 3574(a), (b), (c), or (d). Under section 3574(b), the employer shall not grant recognition if another union challenges the appropriateness of the unit or submits a competing claim of representation together with proof of support from at least 30 percent of the proposed unit. PERB Regulation 51090(a) provides that if an employer denies a request for recognition, and the requesting union wishes to continue pursuing recognition, the union must file a petition for Board investigation. After a union has filed a petition for Board investigation, the Board shall certify the petitioner as the exclusive representative if the Board determines: (1) the employee organization requesting recognition has demonstrated proof of support of more than 50 percent of the employees in an appropriate unit, (2) no other employee organization has demonstrated proof of support of at least 30 percent of the employees, and (3) the employer has not granted recognition. (PERB Reg. 51096.) (pp. 7-8.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1306.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; PROOF OF SUPPORT; In General; Requirements
HEERA section 3574 states that the employer “shall” grant recognition absent any of the circumstances set forth in section 3574(a), (b), (c), or (d). Under section 3574(b), the employer shall not grant recognition if another union challenges the appropriateness of the unit or submits a competing claim of representation together with proof of support from at least 30 percent of the proposed unit. PERB Regulation 51090(a) provides that if an employer denies a request for recognition, and the requesting union wishes to continue pursuing recognition, the union must file a petition for Board investigation. After a union has filed a petition for Board investigation, the Board shall certify the petitioner as the exclusive representative if the Board determines: (1) the employee organization requesting recognition has demonstrated proof of support of more than 50 percent of the employees in an appropriate unit, (2) no other employee organization has demonstrated proof of support of at least 30 percent of the employees, and (3) the employer has not granted recognition. (PERB Reg. 51096.) (pp. 7-8.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1306.01000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; PROOF OF SUPPORT; In General; Requirements
Under PERB Regulations, a unit modification petitioner need not submit proof of support when it seeks to add classifications that would not increase the bargaining unit in question by 10 percent or more. (PERB Reg. 32781(e)(1); Regents of the University of California (2025) PERB Order No. Ad-527-H, p. 2, fn. 1 (Regents).) However, as explained in Regents, supra, p. 9, there is an exception to this rule when a second union files a request for recognition or petition for certification for an appropriate unit that includes classifications at issue in the unit modification petition, and the second union provides sufficient proof of support. (PERB Reg. 32781(e)(2).) (pp. 4-6.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| A530H |
Regents of the University of California
1300.02000: REPRESENTATION ISSUES; CERTIFICATION/VOLUNTARY RECOGNITION; Request for Recognition
HEERA section 3574 states that the employer “shall” grant recognition absent any of the circumstances set forth in section 3574(a), (b), (c), or (d). Under section 3574(b), the employer shall not grant recognition if another union challenges the appropriateness of the unit or submits a competing claim of representation together with proof of support from at least 30 percent of the proposed unit. PERB Regulation 51090(a) provides that if an employer denies a request for recognition, and the requesting union wishes to continue pursuing recognition, the union must file a petition for Board investigation. After a union has filed a petition for Board investigation, the Board shall certify the petitioner as the exclusive representative if the Board determines: (1) the employee organization requesting recognition has demonstrated proof of support of more than 50 percent of the employees in an appropriate unit, (2) no other employee organization has demonstrated proof of support of at least 30 percent of the employees, and (3) the employer has not granted recognition. (PERB Reg. 51096.) (pp. 7-8.) more or view all topics or full text. |
50 | 36 | 07/15/25 |
| 0715E |
Lake Elsinore School District
602.08000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Duty to Bargain Effects
Board dismissed charge alleging that district failed to give notice and the opportunity to bargain the negotiable effects of the district's nonnegotiable decision to reduce of hours of instructional aides. No duty to bargain effects caused by reduction in aide time as main purpose of instructional aides hired under School Improvement Project was the maximization of direct instructional assistance of students. more or view all topics or full text. |
13 | 20027 | 12/29/88 |
| 0347E |
Modesto City Schools
602.06000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Generalized Effect or Continuing Impact
Employers insistence on consecutive evaluation for teachers considered substandard is policy of generalized application and continuing effect. more or view all topics or full text. |
7 | 14259 | 09/27/83 |
| 0646E |
Lake Elsinore School District * * * OVERRULED by State of California (Department of Agriculture) (2002) PERB Decision No. 1473-S
602.08000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Duty to Bargain Effects
* * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by State of California (Department of Agriculture) (2002) PERB Decision No. 1473-S. * * *
District had no duty to provide the exclusive representative of certificated unit notice and an opportunity to negotiate possible effects of decision to reduce hours of members of the classified unit (instructional aides funded through the School Improvement Program ("SIP")). SIP aides were there to provide individualized instruction to students, not to function as personal assistants to teachers. Any diminishing of teachers' preparation time as result of reduction of aide time was, at best, a fortuitous side effect of misuse of the program. Increase in prep time may have resulted from factors other than decrease in aide time. Reduction in SIP aide time would only have an indirect and speculative impact on teachers workday. more or view all topics or full text. |
12 | 19012 | 12/18/87 |
| 2684E |
Modoc County Office of Education
602.03000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); Change in or Deviation from Written Agreement or Policy
Reductions in work hours constitute a change in policy. (p. 10.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 104 | 11/27/19 |
| 2684E |
Modoc County Office of Education
602.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; UNILATERAL CHANGE (FOR NEGOT OF SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SEC 1000, SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION); In General
PERB has recognized three general categories of unilateral changes: (1) changes to the parties’ written agreement; (2) changes in established past practice; and (3) newly created policy or application or enforcement of existing policy in a new way. (p. 9.) more or view all topics or full text. |
44 | 104 | 11/27/19 |
ePERB Portal Status: Operational
The ePERB Portal services have been restored. Thank you for your patience.
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.
