Court and Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) decisions, commentary on California public sector labor relations

Sacramento City Unified School District (2020) PERB Dec. No. 2749-E (Issued on 11/02/20)

The district and union in this case were parties to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) containing a grievance procedure culminating in binding arbitration. The union sought to arbitrate a grievance (the details of which are not relevant to my discussion of this case). The district refused. The union filed a motion to compel arbitration in superior court and prevailed.

The union then filed an unfair practice charge with PERB alleging that the district’s refusal to arbitrate the grievance constituted an unlawful unilateral change; namely, a repudiation of the parties’ CBA grievance provision. The ALJ agreed and PERB affirmed. Notably, PERB affirmed the ALJ’s order that to make the union whole, the district was required to reimburse the union for its attorneys’ fees incurred in bringing the motion to compel arbitration.

County of Santa Clara (2020) PERB Dec. No. Ad-482-M (Issued on 11/2/20)

The statutory language of EERA, the Dills Act, and JCEERA provides for the deferral of an unfair practice charge to arbitration where certain conditions are met. For example, EERA provides that PERB may not “[i]ssue a complaint against conduct also prohibited by the provisions of the agreement between the parties until the grievance machinery of the agreement, if it exists and covers the matter at issue, has been exhausted, either by settlement or binding arbitration.” (Gov. Code, §3541.5(a)(2).) An unfair practice charge that is deferred to arbitration under one of these acts is dismissed. (PERB Reg. 32620(b)(5).) That dismissal is then appealable to the Board. (PERB Reg. 32635.)