Partner Melanie Chaney and Associate Attorneys Gabriella Kamran and Anni Safarloo brought these consolidated Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) charges to a successful conclusion. These cases arose from two separate sets of negotiations between a city and its fire association: 1) a city-driven change in the firefighter job description; and 2) a successor MOA. Each negotiation had a separate bargaining team.
After the city declared impasse in the MOA negotiations, the association refused to continue bargaining over job specification changes, asserting that its duty to bargain was “dormant” because of the impasse in the MOA negotiations. The city responded by filing an unfair practice charge alleging that the association’s refusal to bargain violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA).
Meanwhile, the parties reached a tentative agreement on a successor MOA, without further discussing the job description issue. The city then implemented the job specification changes consistent with the city’s proposal. The association filed its own unfair practice charge alleging that the city unlawfully changed the job description without exhausting its bargaining obligations.
An ALJ held a consolidated hearing and dismissed both charges. The ALJ found that the association had not violated the MMBA in refusing to bargain and further concluded that the association had waived its right to continue bargaining over job specification changes, which served as a complete defense to its charge against the city.
On review, PERB determined the ALJ had adequately addressed the issues raised and that no errors existed that would change the outcome. PERB affirmed the ALJ’s conclusions and dismissed both unfair practice charges.