November 2023 Board Decisions Summary
In November 2023, the Board issued five decisions. The decision descriptions and dispositions are below.
Employer: City of Compton
Case No. LA-CE-1419-M
Issued date: November 1, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: Charging Party Celia E. Francisco appealed an administrative determination by PERB’s Appeals Office rejecting as untimely her amended statement of exceptions to the proposed decision of an administrative law judge. Francisco filed a timely appeal of the administrative determination.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the Appeals Office’s rejection of Charging Party’s late filing.
Employer: West Contra Costa Unified School District
Case No. SF-CE-3470-E
Issued date: November 6, 2023
Precedential
Description: The complaint alleged that West Contra Costa Unified School District failed to bargain in good faith with Adult School Teachers United (ASTU) over the following two decisions, and/or the effects thereof: (1) moving English as a Second Language (ESL) courses from remote instruction in the first 18 months of COVID-19 to a mixed schedule of remote and in-person classes in the 2021-2022 school year; and (2) implementing new assignment procedures for the 2021-2022 school year that changed whether and how ESL teachers would be allotted work opportunities, while also deviating from new seniority calculation methods contained in a tentative agreement for a new contract. The ALJ found in the District’s favor on all claims.
Disposition: The Board affirmed in part and reversed in part, finding that the District implemented new assignment procedures without affording ASTU notice or an opportunity to bargain, while dismissing all other claims.
Employer: City of Compton
Case No. LA-IM-324-M
Issued date: November 6, 2023
Precedential
Description: This case came before the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB or Board) on appeal by the City of Compton from an administrative determination by PERB’s Office of the General Counsel (OGC) approving a request by the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees Local 3947 (AFSCME) pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) that the parties’ bargaining differences be submitted to a factfinding panel. The City and AFSCME are parties to a memorandum of agreement that expired on June 30, 2019. The parties began successor negotiations on January 15, 2020. The parties reached tentative agreements on some articles, but not others. Via an e-mail on May 31, 2023, AFSCME advised the City that it rejected several City proposals and provided the City with a written declaration of impasse. The next day, AFSCME filed its request with PERB for MMBA factfinding. On June 2, 2023, AFSCME filed a copy of the May 31 e-mail message to the City declaring impasse. The City opposed AFSCME’s factfinding request, asserting that the parties had not yet reached impasse, and therefore, the request was inappropriate and premature. OGC issued an administrative determination approving AFSCME’s factfinding request. The City appealed the administrative determination, again asserting that though the factfinding request was timely, it was insufficient because the parties are not actually at impasse. ASFCME opposed the City’s appeal.
Disposition: The Board affirmed OGC’s administrative determination approving the request for factfinding, finding that OGC correctly concluded that the request was timely under MMBA section 3505.4 and PERB Regulation 32802 and procedurally proper. The Board noted PERB has reiterated on multiple occasions that in resolving a request for factfinding, it does not evaluate whether the parties are in fact at impasse. (See, e.g., County of Santa Clara (2020) Order No. Ad-483-M, p. 4; City of Salinas (2018) PERB Order No. Ad-457-M, p. 6; Santa Cruz Central Fire Protection District (2016) PERB Order No. Ad‑436-M, pp. 6-7.) The City’s appeal failed to establish any reason for a different result.
Employer: City of Santa Ana
Case Nos. LA-CE-1563-M & LA-CE-1620-M
Issued date: November 9, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: Case No. LA-CE-1563-M came before the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB or Board) on the City of Santa Ana’s exceptions and Santa Ana Police Officers Association’s cross-exceptions to the proposed decision of an administrative law judge (ALJ). Case No. LA-CE-1620-M came before PERB on the City’s exceptions to a separate proposed decision of the same ALJ. While these cases were pending before the Board, the parties executed a settlement agreement that resolved the disputes underlying the unfair practice charges along with several matters pending before other PERB divisions. Accordingly, the Association requested to withdraw the unfair practice charges with prejudice. The City did not oppose this request. Further, the parties jointly requested to withdraw their pending exceptions.
Disposition: The Board granted the Association’s unopposed request to withdraw the unfair practice charges with prejudice, and the parties’ joint request to withdraw their pending exceptions.
Employer: San Francisco Community College District
Case No. SF-CE-3357-E
Issued date: November 20, 2023
Non-Precedential
Description: David Lisker alleged that his employer, San Francisco Community College District, violated the Educational Employment Relations Act by taking numerous adverse actions against him because he engaged in EERA-protected activities. The administrative law judge (ALJ) dismissed the complaint after a hearing, finding there was no causal nexus between the dismissed adverse actions and Lisker’s protected activity. Lisker timely filed exceptions.
Disposition: In a non-precedential decision, the Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision after discussion of the requirement to allege facts to establish nexus.