Meyers-Milias-Brown Act

From California Criminal Law Wiki
Revision as of 19:35, 2 January 2020 by Sysop (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Also known as MMBA

Gov. Code sections 3500-3511

Local provisions IBEWR

IBEW v City of Gridley (1983) 34 Cal.3d 191; Huntington Beach Police Officers Ass'n v City of Huntington Beach (1976) 58 Cal.App.3d 492; County of Amador (2013) PERB Dec. No. 2318M, 38 PERC 23.

8 Cal Code Regs §§61000–61630.

Scope of representation

Gov. Code 3504 Fire Fighters Union v. City of Vallejo (1974) 12 Cal.3d 608. Anaheim Union High School District (1981) PERB Dec. No. 0177E [5 PERC ¶ 12148] Claremont Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Claremont (2006) 39 Cal.4th 623

Duty to Bargain

Gov. Code 3505

An unfair practice to refuse or fail to negotiate in good faith. Gov. Code 3506.5(c) 8 Cal Code Regs §§32603(c), 32604(c), 32606(c), 32607(c), 32608(c), 32609(c), 32610(c), 32611(c).

Good faith bargaining requires a genuine effort to reach agreement. Placentia Fire Fighters v City of Placentia (1976) 57 CA3d 9. Negotiations must continue until agreement is reached, or negotiations have reached impasse. Public Employment Relations Bd. v Modesto City Schs. Dist. (1982) 136 CA3d 881. Examples of "bad faith bargaining" include "surface bargaining" with no effort at compromise; unreasonably delaying bargaining sessions; not giving negotiators enough authority; reneging on a tentative agreement; or attempts by either side to bypass negotiators, such as a union's dealing directly with the employer's governing body or the employer negotiating directly with employees. See City of San Jose (2013) PERB Dec. No. 2341M, 38 PERC 94; Chino Valley Unified Sch. Dist. (1999) PERB Dec. No. 1326, 23 PERC 30097; Oakland Unified Sch. Dist. (1983) PERB Dec. No. 0326E, 7 PERC 14195; Walnut Valley Unified Sch. Dist. (1981) PERB Dec. No. 0160E, 5 PERC 12038. However, it is not bad faith to fail to reach agreement on mandatory subjects, as long as a good faith effort has been made and impasse procedures have been exhausted. See City of Davis (2018) PERB Dec. No. 2582M, 43 PERC 51; State of Cal. Dep't of Forestry & Fire Protection (1993) PERB Dec. No. 0999S, 17 PERC 24112; Davis Joint Unified Sch. Dist. (1984) PERB Dec. No. 0393E, 8 PERC 15136. It also is not bad faith to refuse to negotiate over a nonmandatory subject of bargaining. Berkeley Unified Sch. Dist. (2012) PERB Dec. No. 2268E, 37 PERC 7; Lake Elsinore School Dist. (1986) PERB Dec. No. 0603E, 11 PERC 18022. Whether conduct satisfies the duty to bargain is measured by the totality of circumstances. See Fresno County In-Home Supportive Servs. Pub. Auth. (2015) PERB Dec. No. 2418M, 39 PERC 133; Muroc Unified Sch. Dist. (1978) PERB Dec. No. 0080E, 3 PERC 10004. See also Zerger, California Public Sector Labor Relations, chap 6 (2018) for a detailed summary and citations to leading cases defining the duty to bargain in good faith and indicia of bad faith.

It is "per se" bad faith for the employer unilaterally to change the terms and conditions of employment that are within the scope of representation without providing the exclusive representative with notice of the proposed change and the opportunity to negotiate over it. See California State Employees Ass'n v Public Employment Relations Bd. (1996) 51 CA4th 923; Fairfield-Suisun Unified Sch. Dist. (2012) PERB Dec. No. 2262, 36 PERC 176. Stockton Police Officers Ass'n v City of Stockton (1988) 206 CA3d 62. The employer may unilaterally implement a proposed change only after negotiations have reached an impasse and impasse procedures (see §21.26) have been exhausted without an agreement being reached. Public Employment Relations Bd. v Modesto City Schs. Dist. (1982) 136 CA3d 881. However, if the employer notified the union of the proposed change and the union did not request to negotiate within a reasonable time thereafter, the employer may implement the change without negotiations. Metropolitan Water Dist. of So. Cal. (2009) PERB Dec. No. 2055M, 33 PERC 144. If the proposed change addresses a matter already covered by the current collective bargaining agreement, the unilateral change may also be a contract violation, over which a grievance may be filed.