Home | Decisions | Keyword Search by Headnotes

Keyword Search by Headnotes

DecisionDescriptionPERC Vol.PERC IndexDate
2745M County of Sacramento
608.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES; In General
Zipper clause generally permits both parties to refuse to bargain changes in matters covered by the terms of the clause during the life of their bargaining agreement. (p. 21.) But one cannot propose new terms and conditions of employment and simultaneously use the zipper clause as a shield to prevent the introduction of integrally related counterproposals, which amounts to unlawful piecemeal bargaining. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.18000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Lack of Sufficient Authority
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.15000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Other
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.15000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Other
Zipper clause generally permits both parties to refuse to bargain changes in matters covered by the terms of the clause during the life of their bargaining agreement. (p. 21.) But one cannot propose new terms and conditions of employment and simultaneously use the zipper clause as a shield to prevent the introduction of integrally related counterproposals, which amounts to unlawful piecemeal bargaining. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.14000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Boulwarism
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.11000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Failure to Provide Counter-Proposals
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.05000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Dilatory or Evasive Tactics
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.02000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; Inflexible Position
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; In General
The totality of the County’s conduct indicates it engaged in surface bargaining: (1) exhibited a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when claiming a new certification requirement was not negotiable even though it was not an immutable standard; (2) refused to bargain with the union over subjects within the scope of representation (e.g., wage increases tied to certification changes) or present counterproposals; and (3) terminated negotiations after two bargaining sessions without explanation in favor of unilaterally implementing the requirement before reaching a bona fide impasse. (pp. 24-26.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
No items found
Bargaining in good faith requires a genuine desire to reach an agreement, and the Board thus looks to the entire course of negotiations, at and away from the table, to determine whether the respondent bargained with the requisite intent to reconcile differences and reach agreement. The ultimate inquiry is whether the totality of a respondent’s conduct was sufficiently egregious to frustrate negotiations or avoid agreement. (p. 23.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; In General
Zipper clause generally permits both parties to refuse to bargain changes in matters covered by the terms of the clause during the life of their bargaining agreement. (p. 21.) But one cannot propose new terms and conditions of employment and simultaneously use the zipper clause as a shield to prevent the introduction of integrally related counterproposals, which amounts to unlawful piecemeal bargaining. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; In General
PERB uses a “per se” or “totality of conduct” test to determine whether a respondent violated its obligation to meet and confer in good faith. Although the same conduct may give rise to violations under both per se and surface bargaining theories, they are necessarily different theories and must be alleged as separate unfair practices in the complaint. (pp. 11-12.) The omission of one theory does not foreclose its later consideration if the charging party: (1) moves to amend the complaint to add the independent allegation, or (2) satisfies the unalleged violation doctrine. (p. 13.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
606.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES; In General
PERB uses “totality of the conduct” and “totality of the circumstances” interchangeably to describe the standard for assessing bad faith bargaining conduct that is not per se unlawful—conduct PERB frequently characterizes as “surface bargaining.” (p. 9, fn. 8.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
605.04000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; OTHER PER SE VIOLATIONS; Conditional Bargaining
Zipper clause generally permits both parties to refuse to bargain changes in matters covered by the terms of the clause during the life of their bargaining agreement. (p. 21.) But one cannot propose new terms and conditions of employment and simultaneously use the zipper clause as a shield to prevent the introduction of integrally related counterproposals, which amounts to unlawful piecemeal bargaining. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
605.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; OTHER PER SE VIOLATIONS; Outright Refusal to Bargain
Zipper clause generally permits both parties to refuse to bargain changes in matters covered by the terms of the clause during the life of their bargaining agreement. (p. 21.) But one cannot propose new terms and conditions of employment and simultaneously use the zipper clause as a shield to prevent the introduction of integrally related counterproposals, which amounts to unlawful piecemeal bargaining. (pp. 21-22.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
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 uses a “per se” or “totality of conduct” test to determine whether a respondent violated its obligation to meet and confer in good faith. Although the same conduct may give rise to violations under both per se and surface bargaining theories, they are necessarily different theories and must be alleged as separate unfair practices in the complaint. (pp. 11-12.) The omission of one theory does not foreclose its later consideration if the charging party: (1) moves to amend the complaint to add the independent allegation, or (2) satisfies the unalleged violation doctrine. (p. 13.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
601.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000); In General, Per Se and Totality of Conduct; Prima Facie Case
PERB uses a “per se” or “totality of conduct” test to determine whether a respondent violated its obligation to meet and confer in good faith. Although the same conduct may give rise to violations under both per se and surface bargaining theories, they are necessarily different theories and must be alleged as separate unfair practices in the complaint. (pp. 11-12.) The omission of one theory does not foreclose its later consideration if the charging party: (1) moves to amend the complaint to add the independent allegation, or (2) satisfies the unalleged violation doctrine. (p. 13.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
601.01000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000); In General, Per Se and Totality of Conduct; Prima Facie Case
PERB uses “totality of the conduct” and “totality of the circumstances” interchangeably to describe the standard for assessing bad faith bargaining conduct that is not per se unlawful—conduct PERB frequently characterizes as “surface bargaining.” (p. 9, fn. 8.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
102.02000: PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; SCOPE OF PERB JURISDICTION; Concurrent or Conflicting Jurisdiction with Other Agencies or Courts; Interpretation or Enforcement of Other Statutes
Changes to job specifications, including training and certification requirements, are within the scope of representation unless the change is imposed by an outside agency or required to comply with an inflexible law or other immutable provision. (pp. 17-18.) Exception did not apply when State law set specific requirements for certain emergency personnel but did not discuss dispatchers at issue. (pp. 18-19.) Exception did not apply where a local agency, although granted authority to establish the policies and procedures at issue, was not an outside agency but a department of the same agency. (pp. 19-20.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
101.02000: PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; APPLICABILITY OF AND CONFLICTS WITH OTHER STATUTES; Conflicts Between PERB-Administered Laws and Other California Statutes; Education Code/Supersession; MMBA Supersession
Changes to job specifications, including training and certification requirements, are within the scope of representation unless the change is imposed by an outside agency or required to comply with an inflexible law or other immutable provision. (pp. 17-18.) Exception did not apply when State law set specific requirements for certain emergency personnel but did not discuss dispatchers at issue. (pp. 18-19.) Exception did not apply where a local agency, although granted authority to establish the policies and procedures at issue, was not an outside agency but a department of the same agency. (pp. 19-20.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
2745M County of Sacramento
101.01000: PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; APPLICABILITY OF AND CONFLICTS WITH OTHER STATUTES; In General
Changes to job specifications, including training and certification requirements, are within the scope of representation unless the change is imposed by an outside agency or required to comply with an inflexible law or other immutable provision. (pp. 17-18.) Exception did not apply when State law set specific requirements for certain emergency personnel but did not discuss dispatchers at issue. (pp. 18-19.) Exception did not apply where a local agency, although granted authority to establish the policies and procedures at issue, was not an outside agency but a department of the same agency. (pp. 19-20.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 39 09/18/20
0375E Healdsburg Union High School District and Healdsburg Union School District/San Mateo City School District
608.07000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES; Waiver by Union; Contract Waivers; Bargaining History Estoppel; Disclaimer; Supersession
Unless external law sets an inflexible standard or other immutable provision, bargaining over a proposal within the scope of representation should not be precluded. (pp. 6-7; see, e.g., PERB Decision No. 375 headnotes under Sections 101.01000, 101.02000, 102.02000.) more or view all topics or full text.		 8 15021 01/05/84
2268E Berkeley Unified School District
608.07000: EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; DEFENSES; Waiver by Union; Contract Waivers; Bargaining History Estoppel; Disclaimer; Supersession
When external law establishes immutable provisions in an area otherwise within the scope of representation, matters are negotiable only to the extent of the employer’s discretion, that is, to the extent that the external law does not “set an inflexible standard or insure immutable provisions.” (p. 9.) District’s proposed recoupment procedures for overpaid wages to individual employees exceeds the negotiable exceptions to California’s immutable policies protected employee wages from prejudgment attachment. (pp. 9-11.) more or view all topics or full text.		 37 7 05/29/12
2738H Trustees of the California State University (San Marcos)
1107.18000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD; Review of Findings Not Excepted To
An ALJ’s factual findings, conclusions of law, and proposed remedies to which neither party excepts are not before the Board on appeal but remain binding on the parties. (p. 2, fn. 2 and 3.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 26 07/28/20
2738H Trustees of the California State University (San Marcos)
1107.06000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD; De Novo Review; Standard of Review by Board
When resolving exceptions to a proposed decision, the Board applies a de novo standard of review. Under this standard, the Board is free to make different factual findings and reach different legal conclusions than those in the proposed decision. (p. 7.) more or view all topics or full text.		 45 26 07/28/20