Pocket Guide to Factfinding (2nd ed., 2016)
$27.00
By M. Carol Stevens, Janae Novotny, and Janet Cory Sommer
2nd edition, 2016
470 in stock
Description
This compact resource explains the statutory requirements, best practices and practical basics for the four public sector labor relations statutes in California that require factfinding…EERA, HEERA, MMBA and IHSSEERA.
CPER’s newest guide covers:
- Impasse and factfinding process
- Analyzing and presenting factfinding criteria
- Factfinding and the good faith duty to bargain
- Scope of bargaining and factfinding
- Major court cases and decisions
- Pertinent statutes
- PERB regulations
- Resources
- Factfinding timelines
Table of Contents
Contents
I. Introduction | 1 |
---|---|
A. Statutory Requirements | 1 |
B. Best Practices | 1 |
C. Practical Basics | 2 |
II. Impasse and Factfinding Process | 3 |
A. Statutory Requirements | 3 |
1. Educational Employment Relations Act and Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act |
4 |
2. Meyers-Milias-Brown Act and In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act |
9 |
3. Impact and effects issues are subject to factfinding | 13 |
B. The Practical Process | 15 |
1. Purpose | 15 |
2. Burden of persuasion | 16 |
3. Hearing procedures | 16 |
4. Factfinding report | 17 |
III. Analyzing and Presenting Factfinding Criteria | 18 |
A. Comparison of Wages, Hours, and Conditions of Employment | 18 |
1. Factfinders view comparability, with ability to pay, as the most important factfinding criteria |
18 |
2. Factfinders prefer a list of comparable agencies that the public agency and the union have agreed on and used for similar purposes |
19 |
3. Factfinders favor well-documented rationale for a proposed set of comparables, as well as well-documented data from a party’s selected comparators |
19 |
4. The party proposing a change from a historical universe of comparable agencies has the burden of demonstrating both that the earlier universe is inappropriate and that the universe it now proposes is appropriate |
23 |
5. When considering the appropriateness of a universe of comparison agencies, factfinders generally look to certain criteria |
23 |
B. Interest and Welfare of the Public and the Financial Ability of the Public Agency |
26 |
1. Raise ability-to-pay at the outset of negotiations | 26 |
2. Ability-to-pay involves many factors, not just the immediate crisis | 27 |
3. The agency budget alone is not persuasive | 28 |
4. Do not rely solely on an ability-to-pay argument and neglect a thorough analysis of other statutory factfinding criteria |
29 |
5. If the parties’ final offers are close, ability to-pay arguments will be minimized |
31 |
6. A factfinder may not be persuaded by an ability-to-pay argument if the agency appears not to control its own expenditures and appears to be making only expenditure priority choices |
31 |
7. The accuracy of the agency’s budgeting process, including projections and assumptions, must be able to withstand contrary evidence |
32 |
8. The agency’s budget accuracy will be tested historically by comparing projected versus actual changes in general fund balances |
32 |
9. The interests and welfare of the public | 33 |
C. Consumer Price Index (CPI)/Cost of Living | 34 |
1. Consumer-price-index basics | 34 |
2. What is the difference between the CPI-U and the CPI-W? | 34 |
3. Comparison of total compensation and CPI increases | 35 |
4. Using the appropriate statistical region or report | 35 |
5. Understanding CPI-related statistical and mathematical calculation |
36 |
6. Using 5- or 10-year historical CPI statistics | 36 |
7. Using trends for the past months to project the CPI prospectively | 37 |
D. Applicable State and Federal Laws | 37 |
E. Local Rules (MMBA and IHSS-EERA Only) | 38 |
F. Overall Compensation | 38 |
G. Stipulation of Parties | 39 |
H. Other Factors Traditionally Considered | 39 |
IV. Factfinding and the Good Faith Duty to Bargain | 40 |
A. Duty to Bargain Includes Impasse and Impasse Procedures | 40 |
B. Continuation of the Status Quo and the Duty to Bargain After Expiration of Contract/MOU |
41 |
C. Breaking Impasse and Reviving Negotiations | 42 |
D. Last, Best, and Final Offer Requirements | 44 |
E. Unilateral Adoption of a Duration Clause Cannot Waive a Union’s Right to Negotiate | 45 |
F. Strikes and Impasse Procedures | 46 |
V. Scope of Bargaining and Factfinding | 47 |
A. Insistence to Impasse on Non-Mandatory Subject of Bargaining Violates the Duty to Bargain |
47 |
B. Party Must Protest the Submission of a Non-Mandatory Subject to Factfinding |
48 |
C. Factfinding Panel Lacks Jurisdiction to Determine Whether or Not a Subject Is Within the Scope of Bargaining |
48 |
D. Procedure for Raising a Scope of Bargaining Issue During Factfinding |
49 |
VI. Major Court and PERB Decisions | 53 |
A. Definition of Impasse | 53 |
B. Declaring and Determining Impasse | 53 |
C. Breaking Impasse and Reviving Negotiations | 54 |
D. Duty to Participate in Good Faith in Impasse Procedures | 55 |
E. Duty to Participate in Good Faith in Impasse to Impasse | 56 |
F. Post-Impasse | 59 |
VII. Statutes | 60 |
A. Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) | 61 |
B. Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) | 65 |
C. Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA) | 70 |
D. In-Home Supportive Services Employer-Employee Relations Act (IHSSEERA) | 76 |
VIII. Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) Regulations | 81 |
Article 6. Impasse Procedures | 81 |
IX. PERB Resources | 88 |
X. Factfinding Timelines | 89 |
A. Impasse and Factfinding Timeline: EERA and HEERA | 89 |
B. Impasse and Factfinding Timeline: MMBA | 92 |
C. Impasse and Factfinding Timeline: IHSS | 95 |
11. Table of Cases | 98 |
Additional information
Weight | 0.625 lbs |
---|---|
Dimensions | 10 × 6 × 0.5 in |
Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, UC Berkeley
California's number one resource for employer/employee relations