Board Decisions Summary – May 2022
In May, the Board issued four decisions. The decision descriptions and dispositions are below.
Decision No. 2817
Employer: Los Rios Community College District and Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279
Case Nos.: SA-CE-2983-E and SA-CO-640-E
Issued date: May 2, 2022
Description: Deglow appealed the dismissal of her unfair practice charges alleging that: (1) the District violated the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) by failing to correct her hire date, thus depriving her of longevity pay; and (2) the Federation violated EERA by causing or attempting to cause her employer to deprive her of longevity pay. The Office of the General Counsel (OGC) summarily dismissed both charges for failure to state a prima facie case, based on application of the litigation sanction the Board articulated in Los Rios Community College District and Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (2021) PERB Decision No. 2776 (Los Rios). OGC found that though Deglow’s charges allege a new longevity increment for 2019-2020, the underlying basis is the same dispute Deglow previously litigated concerning the District’s asserted failure to correct her hire date and the Federation’s asserted failure to take action regarding that dispute.
Disposition: The Board dismissed the unfair practice charges without leave to amend and clarified that the litigation sanction against Deglow articulated in Los Rios, supra, PERB Decision No. 2776, and reiterated in Los Rios Community College District and Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 (2021) PERB Decision No. 2777, applies not only to 20-year longevity increments, but to any dispute about a longevity increment premised on the underlying dispute about Deglow’s hire date or missing service credits.
Decision No. 2818-I
Employer: Orange County Superior Court & Region 4 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee
Case No. LA-CE-37-I
Issued date: May 5, 2022
Description: California Federation of Interpreters, Local 39000 TNG-CWA (CFI) filed exceptions to the proposed decision of an administrative law judge (ALJ) dismissing its unfair practice charge against Orange County Superior Court and/or the Region 4 Court Interpreter Employment Relations Committee. CFI alleged that the Court made an unlawful unilateral change when it disciplined a bargaining unit member based on the accuracy of their interpretation, without affording CFI an opportunity to meet and confer over the decision to implement the new discipline criterion or procedure and/or the effects of that decision. The ALJ dismissed the unfair practice charge and complaint, finding CFI failed to demonstrate a change in policy based on the narrow facts of the case, which included that the single reprimand at issue was based on conduct the bargaining unit employee admitted to in an investigatory interview.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the proposed decision, finding that CFI failed to demonstrate that the Court changed policy when it issued the reprimand, and thus failed to establish a prima facie case of a unilateral change in violation of the Court Interpreter Act, section 71825, subdivision (c). The Board therefore dismissed the complaint and underlying unfair practice charge.
Decision No. 2819
Employer: Cerritos Community College District
Case No. LA-CE-6378-E
Issued date: May 6, 2022
Description: Respondent Cerritos Community College District excepted to an ALJ’s proposed decision concluding that it had violated its duty to bargain in good faith with the Cerritos College Faculty Federation, American Federation of Teachers Local 6215 (Federation) over proposals on: (1) standards and procedures regarding discipline short of suspension or dismissal for full-time faculty; (2) the use of reassignment, assignment loss, and mandatory training as discipline for faculty; (3) misconduct investigations, including information the District will disclose to the Federation and accused faculty member during such investigations; and (4) provisions for paid administrative leave. The ALJ dismissed the Federation’s remaining allegation.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the proposed decision.
Decision No. 2820-M
Employer: County of Santa Clara
Case No. SF-CE-1872-M
Issued date: May 12, 2022
Description: Registered Nurses Professional Association (RNPA) filed an unfair practice charge against County of Santa Clara alleging that the County violated the MMBA by unilaterally issuing Clinical Nurses new assignments without providing RNPA notice and an opportunity to bargain. PERB’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) found that the new assignments were reasonably comprehended within the nurses’ existing assignments, and OGC therefore dismissed the charge.
Disposition: The Board granted RNPA’s appeal and directed OGC to issue a complaint alleging that the County materially changed job assignments without providing RNPA notice and an opportunity to bargain. The Board held that “reasonably comprehended” is an objective standard that refers to what a reasonable employee would comprehend based on all relevant circumstances, including, but not limited to, past practice, training, and job descriptions. The Board found there are contested, outcome-determinative facts that must be resolved after an evidentiary hearing.