The IBEW, Local 18, represents the water distribution employees who work for the City of Azusa Light & Power (ALP). The City assigned these employees to implement a Service Line Inventory project in response to state and federal regulations regarding the use of lead pipes in water systems. ALP management believed that the project work was within the scope of the employees’ duties.
IBEW filed an unfair practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). IBEW alleged that the City violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) when it assigned water employees to perform a Service Line Inventory of the City’s roughly 24,000 customer service lines, and to meet daily inspection quotas. IBEW alleged that the City changed the employees’ duties without providing IBEW adequate advance notice and opportunity to meet and confer over the decision and the effects.
An administrative law judge (ALJ) agreed with IBEW. The ALJ concluded that the City had violated its duty to bargain in good faith because the Service Line Inventory project was not within the employees’ existing job duties. The ALJ found that the project required: new and distinct job duties; the employees to receive training; and the employees to work alone in week-long assignments to perform new, repetitive physical tasks. The ALJ ordered the City to cease and desist, post a notice that the City had violated the MMBA, and read the notice aloud (aka a spoken notice). The ALJ did not order make-whole relief or order a bargaining remedy because the project was already complete.
IBEW excepted to the ALJ’s proposed remedy and requested PERB to order make-whole relief for the employees. PERB pointed to a long line of PERB decisions that hold that if the charging party establishes a unilateral change involving extra work, then extra pay is a proper remedy as long as there is a reasonable basis for estimating the pay. PERB noted that the MOU provided 5% pay for out-of-classification work. PERB also noted that the City had previously granted two groups of employees either a salary increase or a special assignment pay in the amount of 10% for their work to install smart meters. PERB decided that the smart meter project was similar to the Service Line Inventory work and awarded 10% pay increase for the time the employees spent on the project. PERB also ordered interest on the 10% at an annual rate of seven percent, compounded daily. With this financial remedy in place, PERB found no need for the spoken notice that the ALJ had ordered.
City of Azusa (2006) PERB Dec. No. 3004-M.