California Faculty Association (Williams) (PERB 2116H)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA	STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE	DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD	PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
MELANIE STALLINGS WILLIAMS,	MELANIE STALLINGS WILLIAMS,
Charging Party,	Charging Party,
VV..
CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION,	CALIFORNIA FACULTY ASSOCIATION,
Respondent.	Respondent.
Case No. LA-CO-501-H	Case No. LA-CO-501-H
PERB Decision No. 2116-H	PERB Decision No. 2116-H
June 14, 2010	June 14, 2010
Appearances:	Appearances Melanie Stallings Williams, on her own behalf; Bernhard Rohrbacher, Director	: Melanie Stallings Williams, on her own behalf; Bernhard Rohrbacher, Director
of Representation, for California Faculty Association.	of Representation, for California Faculty Association.
Before Dowdin Calvillo, Chair; McKeag and Wesley, Members.	Before Dowdin Calvillo, Chair; McKeag and Wesley, Members.
DECISION	DECISION
WESLEY, Member: This case is before the Public Employment Relations Board (Board)	WESLEY, Member: This case is before the Public Employment Relations Board (Board)
on appeal by Melanie Stallings Williams (Williams) of a Board agent's dismissal (attached) ofon appeal by Melanie Stallings Williams (Williams) of a Board agent's dismissal (attached) of
her unfair practice charge. The charge alleged that the California Faculty Association (CFA)	her unfair practice charge. The charge alleged that the California Faculty Association (CF A)
violated the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA),' by refusing toviolated the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA), 1 by refusing to
allow non-union members to cast a vote to determine employee support for a proposed two-day-	allow non-union members to cast a vote to determine employee support for a proposed two-day-
a-month furlough program. The Board agent dismissed the charge for failure to state a prima	a-month furlough program. The Board agent dismissed the charge for failure to state a prima
facie violation of the HEERA.	facie violation of the HEERA.
The Board has reviewed the warning and dismissal letters and the record in light ofThe Board has reviewed the warning and dismissal letters and the record in light of
Williams' appeal, CFA's response to the appeal," and the relevant law. Based on this review, the	Williams' appeal, CF A's response to the appeal, 2 and the relevant law. Based on this review, the
1
HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq.	HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq.
2
2 The Board did not consider the furlough agreement, dated July 28, 2009, submitted by	The Board did not consider the furlough agreement, dated July 28, 2009, submitted by
CFA with its response to the appeal.	CF A with its response to the appeal.

Board finds the Board agent's warning and dismissal letters to be a correct statement of the law	Board finds the Board agent's warning and dismissal letters to be a correct statement of the law
and well reasoned, and therefore adopts them as the decision of the Board itself.	and well reasoned, and therefore adopts them as the decision of the Board itself.
ORDER	ORDER
The unfair practice charge in Case No. LA-CO-501-H is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT	The unfair practice charge in Case No. LA-CO-501-H is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT
LEAVE TO AMEND.	LEA VE TO AMEND.
N
Chair	Chair Dowdin Calvillo and Member Mckeag joined in this Decision.	Dowdin Calvillo and Member McKeag joined in this Decision.
2

STATE OF CALIFORNIA	STATE OF CALIFORNIA 	ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor	ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD	PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
PER.B
Sacramento	Sacramento Regional Office	Regional Office
1031 18th St	
1031
18th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811-4124	Sacramento, CA 95811-4124
Telephone: (916) 327-8385	Telephone: (916) 327-8385
Fax: (916) 327-6377	Fax: (916) 327-6377
December 14, 2009	December 14, 2009
Melanie Stallings Williams	Melanie Stallings Williams
College of Business and Economics	College
of
Business and Economics
18111 Nordhoff Street	18111 Nordhoff Street
Northridge, CA 91330	Northridge, CA 91330
Re:	Re: 	Melanie Stallings Williams v. California Faculty Association	Melanie Stallings Williams
v.
California Faculty Association
Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H	Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H
DISMISSAL LETTER	DISMISSAL LETTER
Dear Ms. Stallings Williams:	Dear Ms. Stallings Williams:
The above-referenced unfair practice charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations	The above-referenced unfair practice charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations
Board (PERB or Board) on July 20, 2009. Melanie Stallings Williams (Charging Party)	Board (PERB or Board) on July 20, 2009. Melanie Stallings Williams (Charging Party)
Respondent) violated section 3578
ofalleges that the California Faculty Association (CFA or Respondent) viola	alleges that the California Faculty Association (CFA or ted section 3578 of
the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA or Act)" by refusing to	the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA or
Act)1
by refusing to
allow non-union members the opportunity to cast a vote in an internal union matter.	allow non-union members the opportunity to cast a vote in an internal union matter.
Charging Party was informed in the attached Warning Letter dated December 2, 2009, that theCharging Party was informed in the attached Warning Letter dated December 2, 2009, that the
case.	above-referenced charge did not state a prima facie case. You were advised that, if there were	above-referenced charge did not state a prima facie 	You were advised that,
if
there were
any factual inaccuracies or additional facts that would correct the deficiencies explained in that	any factual inaccuracies or additional facts that would correct the deficiencies explained in that
letter, you should amend the charge. You were further advised that, unless you amended the	letter, you should amend the charge. You were further advised that, unless you amended the
charge to state a prima facie case or withdrew it prior to December 10, 2009, the charge would	charge to state a prima facie case or withdrew it prior to December 10, 2009, the charge would
be dismissed.	be dismissed.
On December 10, 2009, this office received a letter from you regarding the above-referenced	On December 10, 2009, this office received a letter from you regarding the above-referenced
matter, as well as with respect to Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-502-H. A copy of your	matter, as well as with respect to Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-502-H. A copy
of
your
letter is attached and states in total as follows:	letter is attached and states in total as follows:
Thank you for your letters in the above referenced matters. We	Thank you for your letters in the above referenced matters. We
do not plan to file amended complaints. We appreciate the time	do not plan to file amended complaints. We appreciate the time
taken in drafting your letters, but disagree with your conclusion.	taken in drafting your letters, but disagree with your conclusion.
Can you advise about the opportunities for review of your	Can you advise about the opportunities for review
of
your
determination?	determination?
RB's Regulations may be found at
J
1
HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq. The text of the HEERA	HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq. The text of the HEERA
and PE	and PERB's Regulations may be found at www.perb.ca.gov	www.perb.ca.gov..

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 14, 2009	December 14, 2009
Page 2	Page 2
Since PERB has not received either an amended charge or a request for withdrawal in this	Since PERB has not received either an amended charge or a request for withdrawal in this
case, the charge is hereby dismissed based on the facts and reasons set forth in the December 2,	case, the charge is hereby dismissed based on the facts and reasons set forth in the December 2,
2009 Warning Letter.	2009 Warning Letter.
Right to Appeal	Right to Appeal
Pursuant to PERB Regulations, " Charging Party may obtain a review of this dismissal of the	Pursuant to PERB Regulations,2 Charging Party may obtain a review
of
this dismissal
of
the
ofcharge by filing an appeal to the Board itself within twenty (20) calendar days after service of	charge by filing an appeal to the Board itself within twenty (20) calendar days after service
this dismissal. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, $ 32635, subd. (a).) Any document filed with the Board	this dismissal. (Cal. Code Regs, tit.
8,
§ 32635, subd. (a).) Any document filed with the Board
must contain the case name and number, and the original and five (5) copies of all documents	must contain the case name and number, and the original and five ( 5) copies
of
all _documents
must be provided to the Board.	must be provided to the Board.
businessA document is considered "filed" when actually received during a regular PERB business day.	A document is considered "filed" when actually received during a regular PERB 	day.
(Cal.	Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, $5 32135, subd. (a) and 32130; see also Gov. Code, $ 11020, subd. (a).)	Code Regs, tit.
8, §§
32135, subd. (a) and 32130; see also Gov.
Code,§
11020, subd. (a).)
A document is also considered "filed" when received by facsimile transmission before the	A document is also considered "filed" when received by facsimile transmission before the
close of business together with a Facsimile Transmission Cover Sheet which meets the	close
of
business together with a Facsimile Transmission Cover Sheet which meets the
requirements of PERB Regulation 32135(d), provided the filing party also places the original,	requirements
of
PERB Regulation 32135(d), provided the filing party also places the original,
together with the required number of copies and proof of service, in the U.S. mail. (Cal. Code	together with the required number
of
copies and proof
of
service, in the U.S. mail. (Cal. Code
Regs, tit. 8, $ 32135, subds. (b), (c) and (d); see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, $5 32090 andRegs, tit. 8, § 32135, subds. (b), (c) and (d); see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8,
§§
32090 and
32130.)	32130.)
The	The Board's address is:	Board's address is:
Public Employment Relations Board	Public Employment Relations Board
Attention: Appeals Assistant	Attention: Appeals Assistant
1031 18th Street	1031 18th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811-4124	Sacramento, CA 95811-4124
(916) 322-8231	(916) 322-8231
FAX: (916) 327-7960	FAX: (916) 327-7960
If you file a timely appeal of the refusal to issue a complaint, any other party may file with the	
If
you file a timely appeal
of
the refusal to issue a complaint, any other pariy may file with the
Board an original and five copies of a statement in opposition within twenty (20) calendar days	Board an original and five copies
of
a statement in opposition within twenty (20) calendar days
following the date of service of the appeal. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, $ 32635, subd. (b).)	following the date
of
service
of
the appeal. (Cal. Code Regs, tit.
8,
§ 32635, subd. (b).)
Service	Service
All documents authorized to be filed herein must also be "served" upon all parties to the	All documents authorized to be filed herein must also be "served" upon all parties to the
proceeding, and a "proof of service" must accompany each copy of a document served upon a	proceeding, and a "proof
of
service" must accompany each copy
of
a document served upon a
party or filed with the Board itself. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, $ 32140 for the required	party or filed with the Board itself. (See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 32140 for the required
contents.) The document will be considered properly "served" when personally delivered or	contents.) The document will be considered properly "served" when personally delivered or
deposited in the mail or deposited with a delivery service and properly addressed. A document	deposited in the mail or deposited with a delivery service and properly addressed. A document
2
PERB's Regulations are codified at California Code of Regulations, title 8, section	PERB' s Regulations are codified at California Code of Regulations, title 8, section
31001 et seq.	31001 et seq.

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 14, 2009	December 14, 2009
Page 3	Page 3
may also be concurrently served via facsimile transmission on all parties to the proceeding.	may also be concurrently served via facsimile transmission on all parties to the proceeding.
(Cal.	(Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, $ 32135, subd. (c).)	Code Regs, tit. 8, § 32135, subd. (c).)
Extension of Time	Extension
of
Time
A request for an extension of time, in which to file a document with the Board itself, must be	A request for an extension
of
time, in which to file a document with the Board itself, must be
in writing and filed with the Board at the previously noted address. A request for an extension	in writing and filed with the Board at the previously noted address. A request for an extension
must be filed at least three (3) calendar days before the expiration of the time required for	must be filed at least three (3) calendar days before the expiration
of
the time required for
filing the document. The request must indicate good cause for and, if known, the position of	filing the document. The request must indicate good cause for and,
if
known, the position
of
each other party regarding the extension, and shall be accompanied by proof of service of theeach other party regarding the extension, and shall be accompanied by proof
of
service
of
the
request upon each party. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, $ 32132.)	request upon each party. (Cal. Code Regs, tit. 8, § 32132.)
Final	Final Date	Date
If no appeal is filed within the specified time limits, the dismissal will become final when the	
If
no appeal is filed within the specified time limits, the dismissal will become final when the
time limits have expired.	time limits have expired.
Sincerely,	Sincerely,
TAMI R. BOGERT	TAMI R. BOGERT
General Counsel	General Counsel
By	
By
----~----
Wendi L. Ross	Wendi L. Ross
Deputy General Counsel	Deputy General Counsel
Attachments	Attachments
cc:	cc: Bernhard Rohrbacher	Bernhard Rohrbacher

California State University	
California
State
University
.dgeNorthridge
Northrl PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT	
P!f
ELtc
Er1PL
o y
MEN
r
RELATIONS BOARD
	~tLi,	HEADQUARTERS OFFICE	TIONs BOMW0
	_
	H£_
.._
c..._,
U_l,
R_n_·
	R_S
O_FF--'---.::/C=--=-E
2009	2009 DEC 10 PM 12: 51
	DEC
IO	
PM
/2:
5 f Department of Business Law	Department
of
Business
Law
College of Business and Economics	College of Business and Economics
December 4, 2009	December
4,
2009
Wendi L. Ross	Wendi L. Ross
Public Employment Relations Board	Public Employment Relations Board
1031 18 St.	103118 th
St.
Sacramento, CA 95811-4124	Sacramento, CA 95811-4124
Re:	Re: 	Melanie Stallings Williams v. CFA	Melanie Stallings Williams
v.
CFA
Unfiar Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H	Unfiar Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H
Demosthenes	Demosthenes Andrew Halcoussis, v. CFA	Andrew Halcoussis,
v.
CF
A
Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-502-H	Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-502-H
Dear Ms. Ross:	Dear Ms. Ross:
Thank	Thank you for your letters in the above referenced matters. We do not plan to file	you for your letters in the above referenced matters. We do not plan to file
amended complaints. We appreciate the time taken in drafting your letters, but disagree with	amended complaints. We appreciate the time taken in drafting your letters, but disagree with
your conclusion. Can you advise about the opportunities for review of your determination?	your conclusion. Can you advise about the opportunities for review
of
	'tl~~ermination?
Sincerely,
-
Melanie Stallings Williams, J.D.	elanie Stallings Williams, J.D.
Professor & Chair	Professor & Chair
18111 Nordhoff Street . Northridge - California 91330-8375 . (818) 677-2905 . fax (818) 677-6079 . e-mail	18111 Nordhoff Street• Northridge • California 91330-8375 • (818) 677-2905 · fax (818) 677-6079 · e-mailBusiness.law@csun.edu	Business.law@csun.edu
The California State University• Bakersfield. Channel islands. Chico• Dominguez Hills• East Bay• Fresno• Fullerton• Humboldt• Long Beach· Los Angeles·Maritime Academy • Monterey Bay• Northridge • Pomona • Sacramento . San Bernardino • San Diego • San Francisco • San Jose • San Luis Obispo • San Marcos · Sonoma · Stanislaus
(
__	
-------

STATE OF CALIFORNIA	STATE OF CALIFORNIA 	AARNOLD	RNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor	SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD	PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
PER.B
Sacramento	Sacramento Regional Office	Regional Office
1031 18th Street	1031 18th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811-4124	Sacramento, CA 95811-4124
Telephone: (916) 327-8385	Telephone: (916) 327-8385
Fax: (916) 327-6377	Fax: (916) 327-6377
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Melanie Stallings Williams	Melanie Stallings Williams
College of Business and Economics	College
of
Business and Economics
18111 Nordhoff Street	18111 Nordhoff Street
Northridge, CA 91330	Northridge, CA 91330
Re:	Re: 	Melanie Stallings Williams v. California Faculty Association	Melanie Stallings Williams
v.
California Faculty Association
Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H	Unfair Practice Charge No. LA-CO-501-H
WARNING	WARNING LETTER	LETTER
Dear Ms. Stallings Williams:	Dear Ms. Stallings Williams:
The above-referenced unfair practice charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations	The above-referenced unfair practice charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations
Board (PERB or Board) on July 20, 2009. Melanie Stallings Williams (Charging Party)	Board (PERB or Board) on July 20, 2009. Melanie Stallings Williams (Charging Party)
alleges that the California Faculty Association (CFA or Respondent) violated section 3578 of.	alleges that the California Faculty Association (CF A or Respondent) violated section 3 578
of
the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA or Act)' by refusing to	the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act (HEERA or Act)1 by refusing to
allow non-union members to cast a vote in an internal union matter.	allow non-union members to cast a vote in an internal union matter.
Background	Background
My investigation reveals the following information.	My investigation reveals the following information.
(CSU)Charging Party is a member of the faculty bargaining unit at California State University (CSU)	Charging Party
is
a member
of
the faculty bargaining unit at California State University
Northridge. CFA is the exclusive representative for the bargaining unit. Charging Party is not	N orthridge. CF A is the exclusive representative for the bargaining unit. Charging Party is not
a member of CFA, but rather pays agency fees to CFA. CFA and the CSU are parties to a	a member
of
CF A, but rather pays agency fees to CF A. CF A and the CSU are parties to a
collective bargaining agreement (CBA).	collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
At the time the charge was filed, CFA was in the midst of conducting an internal vote to	At the time the charge was filed, CFA was in the midst
of
conducting an internal vote to
determine whether CSU faculty members supported the Union renegotiating the CBA in order	determine whether CSU faculty members supported the Union renegotiating the CBA
in
order
to implement a two-day-a-month furlough program (furlough program). CFA permitted only	to implement a two-day-a-month furlough program (furlough program). CFA permitted only
wasunion members-as opposed to non-members-to actually cast a vote. The voting period was	union
members-as
opposed to non-members-to actually cast a vote. The voting period
originally scheduled to occur from July 13, to July 20, 2009." The vote was subsequently	originally scheduled to occur from July 13, to July 20, 2009.2 The vote was subsequently
extended until 5:00 p.m. on July 22.	extended until 5:00 p.m. on July 22.
CF 	unitCFA's main website solicited questions about the proposed furloughs from all bargaining unit	A's main website solicited questions about the proposed furloughs from all bargaining
members. Further, on the CFA website specifically for the CSU Northridge campus, CFA	members. Further, on the CFA website specifically for the CSU Northridge campus, CFA
HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq. The text of the HEERA
1 HEERA is codified at Government Code section 3560 et seq. The text of the HEERA
and PERB's Regulations may be found at	and PERB's Regulations may be found atwwww.perb.ca.gov	ww.perb.ca.gov. .
2 All dates occurred in 2009, unless otherwise specified.
2 All dates occurred in 2009, unless otherwise specified.

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page 2	Page 2
stated, "CSUN CFA chapter invite all faculty to participate in a discussion regarding the	stated, "CSUN CF A chapter invite all faculty to participate in a discussion regarding the
furloughs and layoffs. The discussion will take place on Thursday, June 25" from 10am-12pm	furloughs and layoffs. The discussion will take place on Thursday, June
25
th from 10am-12pm
in the Noski Auditorium." The CSU Northridge website also provided, "You can follow	in the Noski Auditorium." The CSU Northridge website also provided, "You can follow
updates o	updates onn http:/twitter.com/cfasun.	http://twitter.com/cfasun. You can share comments with all CSUN CFA Twitter	You can share comments with all CSUN
CF
A Twitter
followers by including] #cfacsun in your tweet."	followers by includ[ing] #cfacsun in your tweet."
Charging Party's Charge	Charging Party's Charge
Charging Party's charge states in pertinent part as follows:	Charging Party's charge states in pertinent part as follows:
CFA is currently conducting an election to determine whether	CF A is currently conducting an election to determine whether
CSU faculty will authorize the union to renegotiate the contract to	CSU faculty will authorize the union to renegotiate the contract to
permit faculty furloughs. The election deadline is July 22, 2009.	permit faculty furloughs. 	The election deadline is July 22, 2009.
The union will permit only its union members (as opposed to all	The union will permit only its union members (as opposed to all
represented members of the unit) to vote in the election.	represented members
of
the unit) to vote in the election.
It violates Government Code $ 3578 to discriminate between	It violates Government
Code§
3578 to discriminate between
union members and agency fee payers when taking a vote on	union members and agency fee payers when taking a vote on
matters subject to the sole representation of the union. Non-	matters subject to the sole representation
of
the union. Non-
members have paid a fee for such representation and are barred	members have paid a fee for such representation and are barred
from obtaining alternative representation. The CFA, then, is the	from obtaining alternative representation. The CF A, then, is the
sole avenue for representation in the bargaining process. Despite	sole avenue for representation in the bargaining process. Despite
that,	that, CFA has excluded agency fee payers from voting on a	CF A has excluded agency fee payers from voting on a
contract negotiation issue. This violates [Government Code] $	contract negotiation issue. This violates [Government Code] §
3578 because it discriminates against non-members, effectively	3578 because it discriminates against non-members, effectively
disenfranchiseng them.	disenfranchising them.
Further, the conduct violates non-members' rights to freely	Further, the conduct violates non-members' rights to freely
associate under the U.S. Constitution. That is, CSU faculty have	associate under the U.S. Constitution. That is, CSU faculty have
a right to determine the groups with whom they wish to associate,	a right to determine the groups with whom they wish to associate,
including those political activities they wish to support	including those political activities they wish to support
financially. Permitting voting only by those unit members	financially. 	Permitting voting only by those unit members
willing to contribute to the union's non-chargeable political	willing to contribute to the union's non-chargeable political
activities violates that right.	activities violates that right.
Parties' Correspondence	Parties' Correspondence
On July 16, Charging Party sent a letter to Lillian Taiz, President of CFA. Charging Party's	On July 16,3 Charging Party sent a letter to Lillian Taiz, President of CFA. Charging Party's
letter states in pertinent part as follows:	letter states in pertinent part as follows:
I am a CSU professor and non-member of CFA. I write to	I am a CSU professor and non-member of CF A. I write to
request to be permitted to vote in the current election on	request to be permitted to vote in the current election on
ThThis	is document was attached to the charge.	document was attached to the charge.

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page 3	Page 3
furloughs. The CFA website notes that only members are	furloughs. 	The CF A website notes that only members are
permitted to vote on the furlough matter. This violates the	permitted to vote on the furlough matter. This violates the
is theprovisions of California's Government Code since the CFA is the	provisions
of
California's Government Code since the CF A
sole faculty representative in matters including salary and	sole faculty representative in matters including salary and
contract negotiations, services for which non-member employees	contract negotiations, services for which non-member employees
have been charged a fee. Permitting only union members to vote	have been charged a fee. 	Permitting only union members to vote
on matters relating to topics under the sole representation of the	on matters relating to topics under the. sole representation
of
the
union constitutes unlawful discrimination. Government Code $	union constitutes unlawful discrimination. Government Code §
3578 provides that: .	3 578 provides that:
	....
votePermitting agency fee employees to vote only if they join the	Permitting agency fee employees to 	only
if
they join the
union constitutes a poll tax. I urge you, therefore, to immediately	union constitutes a poll tax. I urge you, therefore, to immediately
permit	permit all eligible faculty - union members or not - to vote in the	all eligible faculty - union members or not - to vote in the
current election and in future elections related to agency fee	current election and in future elections related to agency fee
activities.	activities.
The next day, July 17, CFA's Director of Representation, Bernhard Rohrbacher, sent a letter to	The next day, July 17, CF
A's
Director
of
Representation, Bernhard Rohrbacher, sent a letter
to
Charging Party. (CF A provided a copy
of
the July 17 letter in its July 24 response to PERB. 	. 	.
and the contents of the letter are not disputed by Charging Party.	and the contents
of
the letter are not disputed by Charging Party.)
.	Charging Party. (CFA provided a copy of the July 17 letter in its July 24 response to PERB	4 	.
)" Mr. Rohrbacher's letterMr. Rol:1rbacher's letter
states verbatim in part:	states verbatim in part:
I am responding to your letter to Ms. Taiz dated July 16, 2009. In	I am responding to your letter to Ms. Taiz dated July 16, 2009. In
said letter, you claim that in permitting only CFA members to	said letter, you claim that in permitting only CF A members to
vote on the furlough matter, and in excluding non-CFA members	vote on the furlough matter, and in excluding non-CF A members
such as yourself from said vote, CFA breached its duty of fair	such as yourself from said vote, CF A breached its duty
of
fair
representation towards you, in violation of Government Code	representation towards you, in violation
of
Government Code
section 3578.	section 3578.
Contrary	Contrary to your claim, a union is not required to permit non-	to your claim, a union is not required to permit non-
members to vote on proposals for negotiations and contract	members to vote on proposals for negotiations and contract
ratification. See El Centro Elementary Teachers Association	ratification. See El Centro Elementary Teachers Association
(Willis), PERB Decision No. 232 (1982) (adopting ALJ proposed	(rVillis), PERB Decision No. 232 (1982) (adopting ALJ proposed
decision) (union did not breach duty of fair representation	decision) (union did not breach duty of fair representation
towards non-member when it changed its by-laws to remove right	towards non-member when it changed its by-laws to remove right
of non-members to vote on both proposals for negotiation and	
of non-members to vote on both proposals for negotiation and
contract ratification). . . .	contract ratification)
....
Rest assured that we would carefully consider any views on the	Rest assured that we would carefully consider any views on the
furlough issue that you might wish to express to us. You can do	furlough issue that you might wish to express to us. You can do
4
Nothing in PERB case law requires a Board agent to ignore facts provided by the	Nothing in PERB case law requires a Board agent to ignore facts provided by the
Respondent and consider only the facts provided by the Charging Party. (Service Employees	Respondent and consider only the facts provided by the Charging Party. (Service Employees
International	International Association #790 (Adza) (2004) PERB Decision No. 1632-M.)	Association #790 (Adza) (2004) PERB Decision No. 1632-M.)

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page 4	Page 4
so by writing to Ms. Taiz at this address or in any other way that	
so
by writing to Ms. Taiz at this address or in any other way that
is more convenient to you. . . .	is more convenient to you
....
inCharging Party responded to Mr. Rohrbacher's July 17 letter in a letter dated July 21.	Charging Party responded to Mr. Rohrbacher's July
17
letter 	a letter dated July 21.5
Charging	Charging Party's July 21 letter essentially sets forth Charging Party's reasons for disagreeing	Party's July
21
letter essentially sets forth Charging Party's reasons for disagreeing
thewith Mr. Rohrbacher's letter of July 17, including Charging Party's assertion that because the	with Mr. Rohrbacher's letter
of
July 17, including Charging Party's assertion that because
Board's decision in El Centro Elementary Teachers Association (1982) PERB Decision No.	Board's decision in El Centro Elementary Teachers Association (1982) PERB Decision No.
232 (El Centro) was decided under the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) (Gov.	232 (El Centro) was decided under the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) (Gov.
Code, $ 3540 et seq.), not HEERA, it is inapplicable to the present situation. Charging Party	Code, § 3540 et seq.), not HEERA, it is inapplicable to the present situation. Charging Party
also relies upon decisions issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in support of	also relies upon decisions issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in support
of
her position.	her position.
Charging Party's Position as to Notice and Input	Charging Party's Position as to Notice and Input
dated July 30, that	The Charging Party maintains in her subsequent correspondence to PERB dated July 30, that	The Charging Party maintains in her subsequent correspondence to PERB
thatshe was not aware of CFA's main website or the website specifically for CSU Northridge; that	she was not aware
of
CF
A's
main website or the website specifically for CSU Northridge;
she was not aware of the June 25 meeting and "was told that an email invitation went to union	she was not aware
of
the June
25
meeting and "was told that an email invitation.went to union
members but did not receive one"; and she always had the ability and opportunity to write to	members but did not receive one"; and she always had the ability and opportunity to write to
CFA President Taiz.	CF A President Taiz.
Discussion	Discussion
PERB 	that 	reviewPERB has held that matters concerning internal union affairs are immune from review by	has held 	matters concerning internal union affairs are immune from
	by
PERB, unless they have a "substantial impact" on the relationship of unit members to their	PERB, unless they have a "substantial impact" on the relationship
of
unit members to their
Employeesemployer so as to give rise to a duty of fair representation. (California State Employees	employer so as to give rise to a duty
of
fair representation. (California State
Association (Hutchinson and Laosantos) (1998) PERB Decision No. 1304-S; ServiceAssociation (Hutchinson and Laosantos) (1998) PERB Decision No. 1304-S; Service
Employees International Union, Local 99 (Kimmett) (1979) PERB Decision No. 106.) InEmployees International Union, Local 99 (Kimmett) (1979) PERB Decision No. 106.)6 In
numerous cases, the Board has refused to intervene where the alleged unlawful conduct	numerous cases, the Board has refused to intervene where the alleged unlawful conduct
involved internal union affairs and there was no showing
of
a substantial impact on theinvolved internal union affairs and there was no showing of a substantial impact on the
employee-employer relationship. ( California State Employees Association (Hackett) (1993)
employee-employer relationship. (California State Employees Association (Hackett) (1993)
PERB Decision No. 1012-S.)	PERB Decision No. 1012-S.) 	.
In the instant charge, Charging Party's sole claim is CFA's refusal to permit non-members the	In the instant charge, Charging Party's sole claim is CF A's refusal to permit non-members the
opportunity to vote in CFA's internal vote regarding the proposed furlough program. The	opportunity to vote in CF A's internal vote regarding the proposed furlough program. The
Board has previously addressed this issue and held that a "union may exclude non-members	Board has previously addressed this issue and held that a "union may exclude non-members
from voting as long as the union provides them with an opportunity to communicate their	from voting as long as the union provides them with an opportunity to communicate their
views." (Kern High Faculty Association, CTA/NEA (Maaskant) (2006) PERB Decision	views." (Kern High Faculty Association, CTAINEA (Maaskant) (2006) PERB Decision
AAcopy of this letter was sent to PERB and the Union by Charging Party.	copy of this letter was sent to PERB and the Union by Charging Party.
" When interpreting the HEERA, it is appropriate to take guidance from cases
6 When interpreting the HEERA, it is appropriate to take guidance from cases
interpreting the National Labor Relations Act and California labor relations statutes with	interpreting the National Labor Relations Act and California labor relations statutes with
parallel provisions. (Firefighters Union v. City of Vallejo (1974) 12 Cal.3d 608.)parallel provisions. (Firefighters Union
v.
City of Vallejo (1974) 12 Cal.3d 608.)

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page	Page 55
No. 1834 (adopting the Board agent's dismissal), citing El Centro Elementary Teachers	No. 1834 (adopting the Board agent's dismissal), citing El Centro Elementary Teachers
Association, supra, PERB Decision No. 232 (El Centro).)	Association, supra, PERB Decision No. 232 (El Centro).)
In	In El Centro, supra, PERB Decision No. 232, the Board discussed the duty an exclusive	El Centro, supra, PERB Decision No. 232, the Board discussed the duty an exclusive
representative owes to non-members. Therein, the Board, citing Service Employees	representative owes to non-members. Therein, the Board, citing Service Employees
International Union, Local 99 (Kimmett), supra, PERB Decision No. 106, stated:	International Union, Local 99 (Kimmett), supra, PERB Decision No. 106, stated:
the duty of fair representation implies some consideration of the	the duty
of
fair representation implies some consideration
of
the
views of various groups of employees and some access for	views
of
various groups
of
employees and some access for
communication of those views, but there is no requirement that	communication
of
those views, but there is
no
requirement that
formal procedures be established. . . .	formal procedures be established
....
(Emphasis added.)	(Emphasis added.)
Similarly, in Kern High Faculty Association, CTA/NEA (Maaskant), supra, PERB Decision	Similarly, in Kern High Faculty Association, CTAINEA (Maaskant), supra, PERB Decision
No. 1834, the Board affirmed the same as noted in the following:	No. 1834, the Board affirmed the same as noted in the following:
In his third allegation, Mr. Maaskant charges that the Association	In his third allegation, Mr. Maaskant charges that the Association
violated the duty of fair representation by excluding non-	violated the duty
of
fair representation by excluding non-
members from providing input and voting. In order to state a	members from providing input and voting. In order to state a
prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, Charging	prima facie violation
of
the duty
of
fair representation, Charging
Party must show that the Respondent's conduct was arbitrary,	Party must show that the Respondent's conduct was arbitrary,
discriminatory, or in bad faith. A union violates its duty if non-	discriminatory, or in bad faith. 	A union violates its duty
if
non-
members are left completely uninformed about the status of	members are left completely uninformed about the status
of
negotiations or if they are not provided an opportunity to express	negotiations or
if
they are not provided an opportunity to express
their viewpoints. (Fontana Teachers Association (1984) PERB	their viewpoints. (Fontana Teachers Association (1984) PERB
Decision No. 416.) . . .	Decision No. 416.)
...
Mr. Maaskant has not properly alleged that he was completely	Mr. Maaskant has not properly alleged that he was completely
uninformed about the status of negotiations or that he lacked an	uninformed about the status
of
negotiations or that he lacked an
opportunity	opportunity to express his viewpoints. The Association	to express his viev,rpoints. The Association
conducted a survey of all bargaining unit members before	conducted a survey
of
all bargaining unit members before
submitting an initial proposal. Additionally, Mr. Maaskant had	submitting an initial proposal. Additionally, Mr. Maaskant had
access to information through the Association's website and	access to information through the Association's website and
through a binder that was kept in the staff lounge. He was also	through a binder that was kept in the staff lounge. He was also
given one document by Ms. Gibson, the Association's site	given one document by Ms. Gibson, the Association's site
representative.	representative.
Similarly, Mr. Maaskant has not adequately alleged that he	Similarly, Mr. Maaskant has not adequately alleged that he
lacked an opportunity to communicate his views. Mr. Maaskant	lacked an opportunity to communicate his views. Mr. Maaskant
had the opportunity to communicate his views by completing and	had the opportunity to communicate his views by completing and
returning the Association's survey. He also had the opportunity to	returning the Association's survey. He also had the opportunity to
attend both ratification meetings and participate in the question	attend both ratification meetings and participate in the question
and answer sessions. Therefore, because Mr. Maaskant was not	and answer sessions. Therefore, because Mr. Maaskant was not
completely uninformed and he had the opportunity to	completely uninformed and he had the opportunity to

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page 6	Page 6
communicate his views, Mr. Maaskant has not properly alleged	communicate his views, Mr. Maaskant has not properly alleged
that the Association violated its duty of fair representation by	that the Association violated its duty
of
fair representation by
restricting voting to members.	restricting voting to members.
Here, the evidence is quite clear that CFA provided all unit members with notice of the	Here, the evidence is quite clear that CF A provided all unit members with notice
of
the
proposed furlough program and an opportunity to communicate their individual views.	proposed furlough program and an opportunity to communicate their individual views.
CFA's main website solicited questions about the proposed furloughs from all	
CF
A's
main website solicited questions about the proposed furloughs from all
bargaining unit members.	bargaining unit members.
CFA's website specifically established for the CSU Northridge campus invited all	
CF
A's
website specifically established for the CSU Northridge campus invited all
bargaining unit members to the June 25 discussion regarding the furlough program.	bargaining unit members to the June 25 discussion regarding the furlough program.
CFA's CSU Northridge website also explained how individual unit members could post	
CF
A's
CSU Northridge website also explained how individual unit members could post
a message about the proposed furlough program on the website, "Twitter."	a message about the proposed furlough program on the website, "Twitter."
Finally, Charging Party's July 16 letter to CFA President Taiz was promptly responded	Finally, Charging Party's July 16 letter to CFA President Taiz was promptly responded
to by CFA's Director of Representation. In Mr. Rohrbacher's July 17 letter to Charging	to by CF
A's
Director
of
Representation. In Mr. Rohrbacher's July
17
letter to Charging
Party he specifically invited the Charging Party to provide the Union with her	Party he specifically invited the Charging Party to provide the Union with her
individual views about the furlough program and stated that such views would be	individual views about the furlough program and stated that such views would be
carefully considered by the Union.	carefully considered by the Union.
This evidence does in fact show that CFA notified all bargaining unit members of the proposed	This evidence does in fact show
th.at CF A notified all bargaining unit members
of
the proposed
furlough program as well as sought and obtained input about the program from both members	furlough program as well as sought and obtained input about the program from both members
and non-members. The evidence also shows that Charging Party was specifically invited to	and non-members. The evidence also shows that Charging Party was specifically invited to
share her views with CFA President Taiz.	share her views with CF A President Taiz.
Thus, it is determined that Charging Party was not denied notice or an opportunity to express	Thus, it is determined that Charging Party was not denied notice or an opportunity to express
her viewpoints as to the proposed furlough program. Since non-members are not entitled to	her viewpoints as to the proposed furlough program. Since non-members are not entitled to
vote, this charge fails to state facts sufficient to demonstrate a prima facie violation.	vote, this charge fails to state facts sufficient to demonstrate a prima facie violation.
Finally, Charging Party asserts that CFA's actions ". . . violates non-members' rights to freely	Finally, Charging Party asserts that CF A's actions"
...
violates non-members' rights to freely
associate under the U.S. Constitution." PERB, however, does not have jurisdiction to enforce	associate under the U.S. Constitution." PERB, however, does not have jurisdiction to enforce
the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. (Union of American Physicians & Dentists (Menaster)	the provisions
of
the U.S. Constitution. (Union
of
American Physicians & Dentists (Menaster)
(2007) PERB Decision No. 1918-S.) Accordingly, this allegation will be dismissed.	(2007) PERB Decision No. 1918-S.) Accordingly, this allegation will be dismissed.
written,	For these reasons the charge, as presently written, does not state a prima facie case.' If there	For these reasons the charge, as presently 	does not state a prima facie case. 7
If
there
are any factual inaccuracies in this letter or additional facts that would correct the deficiencies	are any factual inaccuracies in this letter or additional facts that would correct the deficiencies
explained above, Charging Party may amend the charge.	explained above, Charging Party may amend the charge.
InInEastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466, the Board	Eastside Union; School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466, the Board
explained that a prima facie case is established where the Board agent is able to make "a	explained that a prima facie case is established where the Board agent is able to make "a
determination that the facts as alleged in the charge state a legal cause of action and that the	determination that the facts as alleged in the charge state a legal cause of action and that the
charging party is capable of providing admissible evidence in support of the allegations.	charging party is capable of providing admissible evidence in support of the allegations.
Consequently, where the investigation results in receipt of conflicting allegations of fact or	Consequently, where the investigation results in receipt of conflicting allegations of fact or
(

LA-CO-501-H	LA-CO-501-H
December 2, 2009	December 2, 2009
Page 7	Page 7
The amended charge should be prepared on a standard PERB unfair practice charge form,	The amended charge should be prepared on a standard PERB unfair practice charge form,
clearly labeled First Amended Charge, contain all the facts and allegations you wish to make,	clearly labeled First Amended Charge, contain all the facts and allegations you wish to
make,
and be signed under penalty of perjury by an authorized agent of Charging Party. The	and be signed under penalty
of
perjury by an authorized agent
of
Charging Party. The
amended charge must have the case number written on the top right hand corner of the charge	amended charge must have the case number written on the top right hand corner
of
the charge
form. The amended charge must be served on the Respondent's representative and the original	form. 	The amended charge must be served on the Respondent's representative and the original
proof of service must be filed with PERB. If an amended charge or withdrawal is not filed on	
proof
of
service must be filed with PERB.
If
an amended charge or withdrawal is not filed on
or	or before December 10, 2009, PERB will dismiss your charge. If you have any questions,	before December 10, 2009,8 PERB will dismiss your charge.	
If
you have any questions,
please call me at the above telephone number.	please call me at the above telephone number.
Sincerely,	Sir:icerely,
Wendi L. Ross	Wendi L. Ross
Deputy General Counsel	Deputy General Counsel
WR	
WR
contrary theories of law, fair proceedings, if not due process, demand that a complaint be
issued and the matter be sent to formal hearing." (Ibid.)
A document is "filed" on the date the document is actually received by PERB,
including if transmitted via facsimile. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, $ 32135.)
contrary theories of law, fair proceedings,
if
not due process, demand that a complaint be
issued and the matter be sent to formal hearing." (Ibid.)
8 A document is "filed" on the date the document is actually received by PERB,
including if transmitted via facsimile. 	(Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 32135.)