Board Decisions Summary – July 2022

In July 2022, the Board issued five decisions. The decision descriptions and dispositions are below.

Decision No. 2824-I

Employer: Region 3 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee

Case No. SA-CE-11-I

Issued date: July 5, 2022


Description: California Federation of Interpreters, Local 39000, the Newspaper Guild-Communication Workers of America (CFI) alleges that the Region 3 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee (Committee) violated the Trial Court Interpreter Employment and Labor Relations Act (Court Interpreter Act) by failing to respond to CFI’s requests to bargain. The proposed decision found that the Committee, which eventually commenced negotiations with CFI, did not violate its duty to meet and confer in good faith, because its conduct did not amount to either a per se violation or a violation based on the totality of the circumstances, and did not interfere with any protected rights. CFI filed exceptions to the proposed decision.

Disposition: In a non-precedential decision the Board affirmed the proposed decision, finding that CFI failed to demonstrate that the Committee violated the duty to meet and confer in good faith or interfered with any rights protected by the Court Interpreter Act. The Board therefore dismissed the complaint and underlying unfair practice charge.


Decision No. 2825-S

Organization: Service Employees International Union Local 1000 (Williams)

Case No. SA-CO-512-S

Issued date: July 7, 2022


Description: Youlanda Williams alleged that Service Employees International Union Local 1000 violated the Dills Act by breaching its duty of fair representation. PERB’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) issued Williams a warning letter and, after she failed to amend her charge or otherwise respond to the warning letter, OGC dismissed the charge for failure to allege a prima facie case of any unfair practice. Williams timely appealed.

Disposition: In a non-precedential decision, PERB affirmed OGC’s conclusions and dismissed the unfair practice charge without leave to amend.

Decision No. 2826-M

Employer: Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency

Case No. SA-CE-1090-M

Issued date: July 7, 2022


Description: This case came before the Board on exceptions by the Tahoe-Truckee Sanitation Agency and cross-exceptions by Philip Stephen Fay to the proposed decision of an administrative law judge, which concluded that the Agency violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) when it issued Fay a disciplinary memorandum and terminated his employment in retaliation for his protected activities. While the matter was pending before the Board on the Agency’s exceptions and Fay’s cross-exceptions, the parties notified PERB that they settled this matter, and requested to withdraw their exceptions and have the complaint, underlying amended unfair practice charges, and the entire matter dismissed with prejudice.

Disposition: The Board granted the parties’ request to withdraw, finding it to be in the parties’ best interest and consistent with the purposes of the MMBA to promote harmonious labor relations, and dismissed the matter with prejudice. The Board noted that Fay’s cross-exceptions raised the issue of whether PERB should adopt the practice of augmenting monetary damages by compound, rather than by simple, interest. The Board did not reach the issue in light of the parties’ request to withdraw, but noted it does not foreclose the possibility of considering whether PERB should adopt that method of calculating interest in a future case.

Decision No. 2827-M

Employer: Marin Municipal Water District

Case No. SF-CE-1894-M

Issued date: July 12, 2022


Description: Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (SEIU) appealed the partial dismissal of its unfair practice charge by PERB’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC). The charge, as amended, alleges that Marin Municipal Water District violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) by unilaterally changing its promotional process and the parties’ grievance procedure, refusing to provide necessary and relevant information, and interfering with protected rights. OGC issued a complaint on the interference allegation and dismissed the remaining allegations for failure to state a prima facie case. SEIU timely appealed the partial dismissal, arguing that rather than dismiss the allegations, the charge should be placed in abeyance pending arbitration. The Board disagreed, finding that even if a charging party could assert deferral as a basis to avoid dismissal, here SEIU did not pursue the matter to arbitration. Because the respondent employer did not assert that deferral to arbitration was appropriate, and has no obligation to arbitrate here, placing the charge in abeyance pending arbitration was not appropriate.

Disposition: In a non-precedential decision the Board affirmed the partial dismissal. The allegations were therefore dismissed without leave to amend.

Order No. Ad-493

Employer: Los Angeles Community College District

Case No. LA-CE-6657-E

Issued date: July 14, 2022


Description: Steve H. Graves (Charging Party) appealed an administrative determination. PERB’s Appeals Office rejected as untimely Charging Party’s filing in response to the Office of the General Counsel’s (OGC) dismissal of his unfair practice charge. Charging Party filed a timely appeal of the administrative determination, arguing in his brief appeal that he had good cause for late filing.

Disposition: The Board affirmed the Appeals Office’s rejection of Charging Party’s late filing, finding Charging Party did not establish good cause for late filing. The amended unfair practice charge remains dismissed without leave to amend.