Summary of Faculty Association of the Yuba Community College District v. Yuba Community College District Unfair Practice Case No. SA-CE-3108-E

The PERB Findings (“Conclusions of Law”)

The District (Yuba Community College District, or “YCCD”) has engaged in unlawful labor practices and violated its duty to bargain in good faith since August 2nd, 2022.

Two years is too long! A recent report from a California labor judge provides clear evidence that this process has been unnecessarily drawn out by the District’s attempts to assert unfounded claims to circumvent standard bargaining practice. Specifically, the decision issued by the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) on July 17, 2024 concluded several important rulings:

The District made unilateral changes to how faculty are assigned their workload that had an inherently destabilizing and detrimental effect upon its bargaining relationship with the full-time faculty union

The District breached its duty to bargain after the prior collective bargaining agreement expired, failing to maintain status quo – regular and consistent practices of more than 20 years

The District illegally attempted to evade its obligation to negotiate mandatory subjects of bargaining, including assignment of work, by asserting a non-existent management “right” without notice or providing the faculty union an opportunity to bargain. Thus, the District interfered with protected union and employee rights.

The District failed in its obligation to provide notice and opportunity to meet and discuss reasonably foreseeable effects a unilateral decision may have on matters within the scope of union representation. This includes failing to meet and confer with the union about alternatives to the decision as part of bargaining.

Legally, an employer cannot refuse to bargain over alternatives and is compelled to engage in good faith bargaining – which the District did not do when it maintained a position that it would implement a unilateral change regardless of the status of bargaining.
The District was unable to provide reasons for a need for their unilateral change. Instead they presented “vague and shifting reasons” for its change which prevented the faculty union from presenting alternatives to address concerns.

The PERB judge was left to consider two possible interpretations.

“Either these were after-the-fact justifications which were not the real reasons for its change, which suggests bad faith; or, they were real reasons that the District did not share until after implementation, and thus deprived the association of its ability to bargain alternatives. Either Way, It is evidence of the District’s bad faith.“
Faculty Association of the Yuba Community College District v. Yuba Community
College District Unfair Practice Case No. SA-CE-3108-E

In reading the summary of findings from PERB’s comprehensive report, one might think that the District would be prudent to consider a “reset” on negotiations, and accept the remedies mandated by the judge. This would be an unspoken acknowledgment of the very real harm their unilateral decision had on not only individual faculty members but on the relationship with full-time faculty as a whole. It is quite obvious that this ongoing legal battle and stalled negotiations has eroded faculty morale. It’s quite obvious that the District violated many legal mandates and cannot be trusted to act in good faith negotiations unless directed by a judge to do so.

And yet, the Yuba Community College Chancellor and Board of Trustees have decided to respond to this order by appealing the decision and asking for extra time.

Here we go again…

Update: September 9th, 2024

Nearing the deadline to submit an appeal, Chancellor Pan reached out to the Faculty Association to say that the district is choosing not to appeal the PERB decision after all. In an all-district email, Pan said the District Bargaining Team “have been given clear direction to work collaboratively with the Association by scheduling more frequent and regular negotiation sessions, a continued and renewed commitment to listening and understanding our union’s concerns, and an openness to exploring innovative and lawful ways to reach an Agreement.”