Skip to content
<!-- Decorative image -->

Why Aren’t PERB Decisions Immediately Available on its Website?

Many of you have noticed that PERB decisions are no longer immediately available on its website. The delay is a side-effect of AB 434, a law enacted in 2017 that requires state agencies to certify that their websites are compliant with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. WCAG 2.0 standards require that documents on websites be accessible to everyone, including people with disabilities such as visual impairments. Prior to AB 434, many of the documents available on state websites did not meet this standard. Indeed, the Sacramento Bee reported that many state agencies had to remove documents from their websites…

Read More
<!-- Decorative image -->

Status of PERB Cases in the Courts of Appeal

Shutterstock 1169495257 1

Back in November 2019, I did a post listing all the PERB cases being challenged in the courts of appeal. Back then, there were (what I believed to be) a record 17 cases pending in the courts. Most of those cases have now been resolved. With the exception of City and County of San Francisco v PERB (2019) 2019 WL 3296947), all the challenges were rejected by the courts.

However, despite how difficult it is to overturn a PERB decision, the current PERB Board continues to draw challenges. There are now at least 18 cases pending in the courts of appeal. Below, I have provided an update on the cases I listed in my November 2019 post, and below that I have provided a list of the currently pending cases.

Read More
<!-- Decorative image -->

Supreme Court: “California Rule” Stands, But Weakened

Today, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Alameda County Deputy Sheriff's Association v Alameda County Employees' Retirement Association et. al. The key issue in this case was whether some of the changes mandated by the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of2013 (PEPRA) unlawfully infringed upon vested pension rights. Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, the media characterized this case as one of "pension spiking." Given that tagline, it's not surprising that the Court found that the Legislature's efforts to combat pension spiking were lawful and rejected the plaintiffs' arguments. However, what everyone wanted to know was whether the Court would…

Read More
<!-- Decorative image -->

PERB Schedules Oral Argument on Interpretation of Gov Code 3550

AFSCME Local 3299 v Regents (Case No. SF-CE-1188-H); UPTE Local 9119 v Regents (SF-CE-1189-H); Teamsters Local 2010 v Regents (SF-CE-1192-H); Teamsters Local 2010 v Regents (SF-PE-5-H) PERB has scheduled a virtual combined oral argument in these cases for July 23, 2020, at 1:30 p.m. Next week PERB will be releasing a link where the public may view the oral argument via a live stream on PERB's YouTube channel. The Board rarely grants oral argument in cases. This will be the first oral argument held by the Board under Governor Newsom. The last time PERB held oral argument was in 2014…

Read More
<!-- Decorative image -->

AB 2850: Adds BART to PERB’s Jurisdiction

AB 2850 was introduced on February 21, 2020, by Assembly Member Low. Like most transit districts, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) is governed by the Public Utilities Code (PUC) for its operations, including its labor relations. Initially, this bill would have placed BART under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, therefore making it subject to PERB’s jurisdiction. However, the bill was recently amended to keep BART under the PUC’s labor relations statutes but to place it under PERB’s jurisdiction for enforcement. If enacted, this bill would create yet another unique statutory scheme under PERB’s jurisdiction. In 2018, Governor Brown…

Read More