County of Riverside (PERB A329M)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL
UNION,
Charging Party,
v.
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE,
Respondent.
Case No. LA-CE-5-M
Petition for Withdrawal
PERB Order No. Ad-329-M
November 25, 2003
Appearances: Tosdal, Levine, Smith, Steiner & Wax by Jon Y. Vanderpool and Service
Employees International Union by Rebecca Miller, Executive Director, for Service Employees
International Union; Liebert, Cassidy & Whitmore by Nate J. Kowalski, Attorney, for County
of Riverside.
Before Baker, Whitehead and Neima, Members.
DECISION
WHITEHEAD, Member: This case is before the Public Employment Relations Board
(PERB or Board) on petition of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) to withdraw
the instant matter without prejudice.
By letter dated September 26, 2003 to the Appeals Office, SEIU stated that it is
withdrawing without prejudice unfair practice case number LA-CE-5-M against the County of
Riverside (County). The Appeals Office transmitted the letter to the Board for disposition. In
the letter, SEIU did not provide any justification for its statement, which was framed as a
statement and not as a request.
In the proposed decision, the administrative law judge (ALJ) held that the County
unilaterally changed its policy regarding the grievability of promotions under the parties’
memorandum of understanding and ordered the County to cease and desist from failing to meet

________________________
and confer in good faith, from unilaterally changing its grievance policy, and from refusing to
process grievances regarding promotions. The ALJ also ordered the County to process the
grievance filed by Carmella Bea MacArthur and to post a notice to employees of the Board’s
order. The County filed exceptions to the ALJ’s proposed decision and SEIU filed a response
to the County’s exceptions.
The Board has typically permitted withdrawal of appeals when that withdrawal is in the
best interests of the parties and is consistent with the purposes of the Meyers-Milias-Brown
Act (MMBA).1 (See e.g., State of California (Department of Corrections) (2002) PERB
Decision No. 1496-S; Newark Unified School District (2002) PERB Decision No. 1499.) Here
the Board does not find that withdrawal is in the best interests of the parties or consistent with
the MMBA. First, SEIU has not provided any justification for its withdrawal from the case.
Second, as SEIU has received a favorable decision from the ALJ in this matter, it cannot
simply extinguish the case. The matter is on the Board’s docket on appeal from the County.
As set forth in PERB regulations, the County has exercised its right to file exceptions and bring
this matter before the Board itself for disposition.2 SEIU has not cited any legal precedent for
expunging that right. Finally, withdrawal without prejudice is not consistent with the purposes
of the MMBA. MMBA section 3500 provides, in pertinent part:
(a) It is the purpose of this chapter to promote full
communication between public employers and their employees
by providing a reasonable method of resolving disputes regarding
1MMBA is codified at Government Code section 3500 et seq. Unless otherwise
indicated, all statutory references herein are to the Government Code.
2PERB's regulations are codified at California Code of Regulations, title 8, section
31001 et seq. See PERB Regulation 32300, 32305, and 32310 regarding the filing of
exceptions to proposed decisions and responses to exception. Contrast PERB Regulation
32625 regarding withdrawal of the charge at various levels of the Board proceedings, up
through the hearing process. There are no regulations addressing the withdrawal of a case at
this stage of the proceedings.
2

wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment
between public employers and public employee
organizations. . . .This chapter is intended, instead, to strengthen
merit, civil service and other methods of administering employer-
employee relations through the establishment of uniform and
orderly methods of communication between employees and the
public agencies by which they are employed.
Allowing SEIU’s withdrawal without prejudice would not result in final resolution of this
dispute. SEIU’s withdrawal of the case therefore would not assist in establishing “uniform and
orderly methods of communication between employees and the public agencies by which they
are employed” or “promot(e) full communications between public employers and employees”
as required by MMBA section 3500(a).
In conclusion, the Board finds that withdrawal does not promote the best interests of the
parties nor is it consistent with the purposes of the MMBA and accordingly denies SEIU’s
petition to withdraw this case.
ORDER
The request by Service Employees International Union for withdrawal of Case No.
LA-CE-5-M is hereby DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Members Baker and Neima joined in this Decision.
3