- Home
June 2023 Board Decisions Summary
In June 2023, the Board issued seven decisions. The decision descriptions and dispositions are below.
Employer: City of California City
Case No. LA-CE-1604-M
Issued date: June 14, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: The California City Miscellaneous Employees Association appealed the partial dismissal of its unfair practice charge by PERB’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC). The charge, as amended, alleges that the City of California City violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) by failing to process, respond to, or acknowledge certain grievances, government claims and public records requests. OGC issued a complaint alleging that the City unilaterally changed the grievance procedure, failed to respond to multiple requests for information, and relatedly interfered with employee and Association protected rights, but dismissed the allegations that the City violated the MMBA by failing to respond to certain government claims, violating section 3505.3, or discriminating against Association‑represented employees, finding that the Association had not stated a prima facie case of those allegations. The Association timely appealed OGC’s partial dismissal of only the discrimination allegation.
Disposition: The Board affirmed OGC’s dismissal of the discrimination allegation for failure to state a prima facie case.
Employer: United Teachers Los Angeles
Case No. LA-CO-1824-E
Issued date: June 14, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: Charging Party Erick Gonzalez appealed the dismissal of his amended unfair practice charge alleging that United Teachers Los Angeles (UTLA) breached its duty of fair representation under the Educational Employment Relations Act by advising that he resign and refusing to appeal to arbitration a Notice of Unsatisfactory Act and Notice of Suspension that Gonzalez’s employer, the Los Angeles Unified School District, issued to him. PERB’s Office of the General Counsel dismissed the charge, concluding that Gonzalez failed to assert how UTLA’s decisions were arbitrary, discriminatory, or in made in bad faith.
Disposition: The Board affirmed OGC’s dismissal.
Employer: Turlock Teachers Association
Case No. SA-CO-659-E
Issued date: June 16, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: Charging Party Elias Ruiz appealed the dismissal of his amended unfair practice charge alleging that his union, Turlock Teachers Association, breached its duty of fair representation under the Educational Employment Relations Act by negotiating a memorandum of understanding regarding COVID-19 testing and reporting and refusing to process his related grievances. PERB’s Office of the General Counsel dismissed the charge, concluding that the allegations were untimely, not under PERB’s jurisdiction, and failed to state a prima facie case of any unfair practice.
Disposition: The Board affirmed OGC’s dismissal.
Employer: Mt. San Jacinto Community College District
Case No. LA-CE-6583-E
Issued date: June 28, 2023
Precedential
Description: This case came before PERB on Mt. San Jacinto Community College District’s exceptions to the proposed decision of an administrative law judge (ALJ). The ALJ found that the District violated the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) when it removed faculty members Rosaleen Gibbons and Farah Firtha as chairs of the Chemistry Department, refused to recognize their subsequent reelection as chairs, reassigned them to teach lower level classes for the Fall 2020 semester, and issued two counseling documents, each in retaliation for protected activities including raising safety concerns and alleging that their removal as chairs was retaliatory. The District excepted, challenging the bulk of the proposed decision’s legal conclusions, and asserting that the ALJ erred in his ordered remedies. The Association urged the Board to deny the District’s exceptions and thus affirm the proposed decision.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the conclusion that the District unlawfully retaliated against Gibbons and Firtha by removing them as department chairs, refusing to recognize their re-election, reassigning them to teach Introductory Chemistry for Fall 2020, and issuing each a counseling document. The Board largely affirmed the ALJ’s ordered remedies, correcting one minor discrepancy and supplementing the remedy to include PERB’s first ordered notice reading.
Employer: Pasadena Area Community College District
Case No. LA-DP-463-E
Issued date: June 28, 2023
Precedential
Description: California Federation of Teachers (CFT) filed a petition to decertify and replace Pasadena City College Faculty Association (PCCFA) as the exclusive representative of a bargaining unit at Pasadena Area Community College District. The unit consists of full-time (regular) faculty and part-time (temporary) faculty. Many part-time faculty work intermittently, meaning they work some terms but not others, or work for one term only. The Office of the General Counsel (OGC) issued an administrative determination concluding that faculty are eligible to vote in the election if they worked during either the Fall 2022 or Spring 2023 terms. PCCFA filed an interlocutory appeal, arguing that this standard would enfranchise many part-time faculty who do not have a reasonable expectation of future employment. OGC certified the appeal to the Board pursuant to PERB Regulation 32200.
Disposition: The Board partially sustained the appeal, holding as follows. Regular faculty may vote if they are employed in the unit on the eligibility cutoff date and are still employed when they cast their ballots. Because the District’s part-time faculty are intermittent employees, they may vote if their work on behalf of the District includes serving in a unit position during two or more of the most recent six instructional terms, including at least one of the most recent three instructional terms. The Board overruled State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) and Association of Staff, Administrative and Financial Employees (1985) PERB Decision No. 532-S to the extent it can be read as requiring OGC to apply the same eligibility standards at the proof of support stage and the election stage.
Employer: County of Riverside
Case No. LA-CE-1457-M
Issued date: June 30, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: Service Employees International Union, Local 721 (SEIU) alleged that the County of Riverside violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act by subjecting its employee Tara Stoddart to a two-hour investigatory interview, issuing her verbal and written reprimands, and enforcing an unspecified photo policy preventing her from taking pictures of unsafe working conditions, in retaliation for engaging in protected activity. Following a formal hearing, the ALJ sustained the allegations with respect to the written reprimand, but dismissed all other allegations. The County excepted to the ALJ’s finding of a retaliation violation; SEIU opposed the County’s exceptions and cross-excepted on the dismissed claims.
Disposition: In a non-precedential decision, the Board affirmed in part and remanded in part the proposed decision. The Board affirmed the proposed decision’s dismissal of the allegations that the County retaliated against Stoddart by interviewing her, verbally reprimanding her, and preventing her from taking photos of unsafe working conditions. However, it set aside the proposed decision’s conclusion with respect to the written reprimand as, unlike the ALJ, it found no direct evidence that its issuance was unlawfully motivated. The Board remanded the matter, rather than dismissed the complaint, because the ALJ failed to make multiple credibility determinations that are necessary to resolving whether SEIU stated a prima facie case of unlawful retaliation, and, if so, whether the County proved its affirmative defense.
Employer: City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency)
Case No. SF-CE-1867-M
Issued date: June 30, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: SEIU Local 1021(SEIU) charged that City and County of San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (City) unilaterally changed shift bid procedures for station agents without affording SEIU notice and an opportunity to bargain. After the City failed to answer the complaint, an ALJ found no good cause to excuse the City from default. The ALJ thus did not hold a formal hearing and instead issued a proposed decision, finding the City violated the MMBA and issuing a remedial order. The proposed decision became final when neither party filed exceptions to it. The Office of General Counsel (OGC) initiated compliance proceedings and later issued an administrative determination concluding that the City fully complied with the ALJ’s remedial order. SEIU appealed, asking the Board to reverse and remand the case to OGC for further compliance proceedings.
Disposition: In a non-precedential decision, the Board denied the appeal.
