Centinela Valley Union High School District (PERB 0062E)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
CENTINELA VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Employer,
and )
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,
CHAPTER 47,
Employee Organization.
)
)
) Case No. LA-R-233
PERB Decision No. 62
August 7, 1978
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances; Alison Mackenzie, Attorney (Paterson & Taggart)
for Centinela Union High School District; John Bruhl, Field
Representative for California School Employees Association,
Chapter 47.
Before Gluck, Chairperson; Gonzales and Cossack Twohey, Members,
DECISION
This case is before the Public Employment Relations Board
(hereafter Board or PERB) on exceptions filed by both the
Centinela Valley Union High School District (hereafter
District) and California School Employees Association,
Chapter 47 (hereafter CSEA) to the attached proposed decision.
The District objects to the hearing officer's finding that the
positions of secretary to the principal, secretary to the
director of the continuation school, duplicating clerk, and
word processing clerk are not confidential and should be
included in the negotiating unit. CSEA objects to his decision
that the secretary to the director of special projects is
excluded from the unit as a confidential position.
)
_-_______)

CSEA originally filed a petition for a unit consisting of
all classified employees in the district. The District
answered by requesting a representation election and later
amended its decision to contest the appropriateness of the
unit, arguing that certain positions included in the proposed
unit are confidential.
At the representation hearing, the parties stipulated that
a unit of all classified employees, excluding management,
confidential and supervisory employees, is appropriate. The
hearing officer accepted that stipulation without inquiry. The
Board, pursuant to PERB rule 32320(a)(2), ,
1/ overrules that
acceptance, remands this case to the hearing officer, and
orders the record reopened to take evidence on the
appropriateness of a wall-to-wall unit of classified employees
in this district. The Board further orders that additional
evidence be taken on the issue of whether the positions in
question are confidential.
DISCUSSION
Appropriateness of the Unit
In its earliest days, the Board developed a policy of
accepting without question the stipulations of parties as to
unit composition, as long as these stipulations were
1/PERB rules are codified at Cal. Admin. Code, tit. 8,
sec. 31100 et seq. Sec. 32320(a)(2) provides:
The Board itself may:
Affirm, modify or reverse the proposed decision, order the
record reopened for the taking of further evidence, or take
such other action as it considers proper.
2

"not inconsistent with a clear and specific mandate in the unit
criteria provisions" of the Educational Employment Relations
Act (hereafter EERA)2/. One of the reasons for adopting such
a policy was to expedite representation elections by
encouraging agreement between the parties on as many issues as
possible. Another factor was that the Board itself had not
yet developed any policies interpreting and applying section
3545.3
In the nearly two years since the Board decided to accept
stipulations without question, it has decided many disputed
unit determination cases and has developed certain policies in
applying section 3545. Yet parties continue to create
2 Tamalpais Union High School District (7/20/76) EERB
Decision No. 1. The EERA is codified at Gov. Code sec. 3540 et
seq. All statutory references are to the Government Code
unless otherwise indicated.
3sec. 3545 provides:
(a) In each case where the appropriateness of the unit is
an issue, the board shall decide the question on the basis of
the community of interest between and among the employees and
their established practices including, among other things, the
extent to which such employees belong to the same employee
organization, and the effect of the size of the unit on the
efficient operation of the school district.
(b) In all cases:
(1) A negotiating unit that includes classroom teachers
shall not be appropriate unless it at least includes all of the
classroom teachers employed by the public school employer,
except management employees, supervisory employees, and
confidential employees.
(2) A negotiating unit of supervisory employees shall not
be appropriate unless it includes all supervisory employees
employed by the district and shall not be represented by the
same employee organization as employees whom the supervisory
employees supervise.
(3) Classified employees and certificated employees shall
not be included in the same negotiating unit.
3

stipulated units which differ substantially from those the
Board has found to be appropriate.
The Board therefore finds it necessary to modify its policy
on stipulations. Henceforth, when it has jurisdiction in a
representation case, it will examine stipulations between the
parties to determine if the stipulations are inconsistent with
the EERA or established Board policies. Established Board
policies are those which the Board has developed and
consistently followed. Thus, the Board does not intend, in
every representation case that comes before it, to overturn the
parties' stipulations merely because the stipulated units vary
from unit configurations previously established by the Board.
However, it will set aside those stipulations which contravene
the EERA or consistent policies established by the Board.
These policies include those relating to community of
interest. Under the EERA, community of interest is a
statutorily mandated consideration in unit determination
cases. The Board therefore considers its established policies
in interpreting and applying this criterion to be significant
enough to justify examining stipulations to ensure that they
comply with these policies.
The Board's new practice with respect to stipulations is
consistent with the Board policy enunciated in PERB rule 33000,
which states,
It is the policy of the Board to encourage
the persons covered by the Act to resolve
questions of representation by agreement
4

among themselves, provided such agreement is
not inconsistent with the purposes and
policies of the Act and the Board.
In the present case, the parties stipulated that a
wall-to-wall unit of classified employees was appropriate. Not
only has the Board never found such a unit to be appropriate,
it has on several occasions found such a unit to be
inappropriate. 4 Based on community of interest criteria, the
Board has consistently created two or three units among
classified employees of elementary and secondary school
districts. Three units are presumptively appropriate,5
regardless of the number of classified employees in a
district:6 instructional aides (paraprofessionals),
operations-support services, and office-technical and business
services.7 The Board finds that three presumptively
appropriate units is a sufficiently well-established policy to
justify overturning a stipulation creating a single classified
unit. This is not to say that the Board is ruling that all
units which differ from presumptively appropriate units are
4 See, for example, Sweetwater Union High School District
(11/23/76) EERB Decision No. 4.
5Foothill-DeAnza Community College District (3/1/77) EERB
Decision No. 10.
6 Shasta Union High School District (10/25/77) EERB
Decision No. 34.
7Sweetwater Union High School District (11/23/76) EERB
Decision No. 4; Fremont Unified School District (12/16/76) EERB
Decision No. 6; San Diego Unified School District (2/18/77)
EERB Decision No. 8; Antioch Unified School District (11/7/77)
EERB Decision No. 37.
5

inappropriate, since the presumption is rebuttable.V
The
Board holds only that it will not accept a stipulated unit that
does not conform to established Board policy unless there are
facts on the record which would enable it to find the unit
appropriate. In this case, there are no such facts, since the
parties did not address this issue at the hearing. Therefore,
the Board remands this case to the hearing officer so that he
may reopen the record and take additional evidence, including
stipulated facts, on the appropriateness of a wall-to-wall unit
of classified employees.
In the future, hearing officers in unit determination cases
over which the Board has jurisdiction should scrutinize
stipulated units to ensure that they comply with the EERA and
established Board policies. If the units do not comply, the
hearing officers should conduct a representation hearing and
elicit evidence, including stipulated facts, which will support
the establishment of the stipulated unit or enable the hearing
officer to issue an appropriate unit determination order.
Confidential Employees
The record in this case does not provide the Board with
enough information to determine whether or not the positions in
8Foothill-De Anza Community College District,
supra, EERB Decision No. 10.
6

question are confidential.9 In Sierra Sands Unified School
District,10 the Board recognized that
the employer should be allowed a small
nucleus of individuals who would assist the
employer in the development of the
employer's positions for the purpose of
employer-employee relations.
Employers need staff support in preparing for negotiations.
Research must be done, reports and proposals must be prepared
and typed, records must be kept. However, the Board also
recognizes that employees who are designated confidential are
denied representation rights under the EERA. Thus, the small
nucleus concept contemplates that only a small number of
employees necessary to the employer to do the staff work needed
to develop its positions shall be given access to confidential
information. Employers cannot unnecessarily distribute
confidential information to large numbers of employees and then
claim them as confidential. Therefore, in each case in which
there is a dispute as to whether positions are confidential,
the Board will examine the facts to determine whether the
employees in question must necessarily have access to
confidential information in the regular course of their normal
duties.
. Code sec. 3540.1(c) provides:
"Confidential employee" means any employee who, in the
regular course of his duties, has access to, or
possesses information relating to, his employer's
employer-employee relations.
10 (10/14/76) EERB Decision No. 2.
7

In this case, the record shows that principals are on the
management negotiating team which develops proposals, and on
the administrative cabinet which discusses negotiations
policies. The record shows that principals receive various
documents, such as draft negotiations proposals, through the
mail, to which their secretaries currently have access.
However, the mere receipt by the secretary's superior of
confidential material cannot make the secretary a confidential
employee. Persons who open mail are not involved in the
development of confidential material and have no essential need
to deal with it. To classify them as confidential would allow
easy abuse of the "small nucleus" concept articulated in Sierra
Sands, since employers could exclude all secretaries from a
unit by unnecessarily allowing them access to confidential
information.
Therefore, the Board needs additional information on the
principals' role in negotiations and grievance processing,
particularly as to the types of written responses they are
regularly expected to make. Most of the principals testified
that if they responded in writing, their secretaries would type
their response. But it was unclear whether written responses
are a normal or necessary part of the District's negotiating
structure. Similarly, the content of such responses was not
defined. The amount of writing that principals are required to
do in connection with negotiations is highly significant in
determining whether their secretaries are sufficiently involved
in developing confidential material. Other important factors
8

are whether secretaries are expected to take minutes of
meetings in which negotiations are discussed or to actively
organize and maintain negotiations files.
Similarly, the Board needs additional information on the
roles of the secretary to the director of the continuation
school, secretary to the director of special projects,
duplicating clerk and word processing clerk in negotiations and
grievance processing.
Since the board has already remanded this case for the
taking of additional evidence on the appropriateness of the
stipulated unit, it will use the opportunity to get additional
information on whether the positions in question are
confidential.
9

ORDER
Upon 	the 	foregoing 	Decision 	and 	the 	entire 	record 	in 	this 	case,
the 	Public 	Employment 	Relations 	Board ORDERS 	that :
This 	case 	be 	remanded 	to 	the 	hearing 	officer 	and 	the 	record
be 	reopened 	for 	the 	taking 	of 	further 	evidence, 	at 	a 	hearing 	or
by 	stipulation 	or 	both, 	on 	the 	issues 	of 	(1) 	whether 	a 	unit
consisting 	of 	all 	classified 	employees, 	excluding management,
confidential 	and 	supervisory 	employees, 	in 	the 	Centinela 	Valley
Union High 	School 	District 	is 	appropriate 	and 	if 	not, 	what
units 	are 	appropriate, 	and 	(2) 	whether 	the 	positions 	of
secretary 	to 	the 	principal, 	secretary 	to 	the 	director 	of 	the
continuation 	school, 	secretary 	to 	the 	director 	of 	special
projects, 	duplicating 	clerk, 	and 	word 	processing 	clerk 	are
confidential.
By:RaymondJ . Gonzales,Membepmber
/ 	/ 	I
H an y G l uck , C h a irperso n
I
I 	Jerilou Cossack Twohey, Membe {J	Ji
10

EDUCATIONAL EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
CENTINELA VALLEY UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION, Chapter 47,
Employee Organization
)
) Case No. LA-R-233
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: Alison MacKenzie, Attorney, for Centinela Valley
Union High School District; John Bruhl, Field Representative,
for California School Employees Association, Chapter 47.
Before Jeff Paule, Hearing Officer.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On April 1, 1976, the California School Employees
Association, Centinela Chapter 47 (CSEA) filed a request for
recognition with the Centinela Valley Union High School
l
D	District (CVUHSD)1 for a unit consisting of all classified
employees.
1 Centinela Valley Union High School District has an enrollment
of 7072 at five high schools and an evening school. See 1977
California Public Schools Directory at p. 172, California State
Department of Education.
-1-

On May 2, 1976, the CVUHSD filed its employer's decision
in which a representation election was requested. On March 1,
1977, the CVUHSD filed an amendment to its employer's decision
in which the appropriateness of the unit was contested. It is
the District's position that certain positions included in the
proposed unit are confidential in nature.
A hearing was held on April 26, 1977, and May 17, 1977.
During the course of the hearing, the parties stipulated that a
unit of all classified employees excluding management, super-
visory and confidential is appropriate. That stipulation is
accepted without inquiry.
The parties further stipulated:
1. The following positions are management: superintendent,
assistant superintendent, administrative assistant, director
of career education, director of continuation school, director
of extended services, director of maintenance and operations,
director of special projects, director of E.S.L., accounting
officer, purchasing agent. This stipulation is accepted
without inquiry.
2. The following positions are considered confidential:
secretary to the superintendent, secretary to the assistant
superintendent. This stipulation is accepted without inquiry.
3. The following positions are in dispute: secretary to the
principal; secretary to the assistant principal; secretary to
the director of career education; secretary to the director of
special projects; secretary to the director of the continuation
school; secretary to the director of the English as a second
-2-

language program; secretary to the director of maintenance
and operations; word processing clerks; duplicating clerk;
payroll clerks; PBX/file clerk; and secretary to the
purchasing agent.
ISSUE
Whether the following positions are confidential:
secretary to the principal; secretary to the assistant
principal; secretary to the director of career education;
secretary to the director of special projects; secretary
to the director of the continuation school; secretary to
the director of the English as a second language program;
secretary to the director of maintenance and operations;
word processing clerks; duplicating clerk; payroll clerks;
PBX/file clerk; and secretary to the purchasing agent.
-3-

CONCLUSION
In Sierra Sands Unified School District, EERB Decision
No. 2 (October 14, 1976), the Board set forth its general
commentary on Government Code Section 3540.l(c) which defines
the term "confidential employee."
2
2 In summary, the Board's
position on the question of confidentiality is that, in
interpreting the Act, the Board feels that an employer should
be allowed a small nucleus of individuals to assist the
employer in its employer-employee relations. Further, the
employees who are designated as "confidential employees"
are not to be considered "public school employees" within the
meaning of the Act. Finally, the Board believes that the
employer's right to the undivided loyalty of a small nucleus
of staff designated as "confidential" outweighs the inherent
denial of representation rights of those employees designated
as "confidential".
2Gov Code Section 3540.l(c) defines confidential employee as
"confidential employee" means any employee who, in the
regular course of his duties, has access to, or possesses
information relating to, his employer's employer-employee
relations.
.
-4-

Secretary to the Principal
The school district has five high schools and one
continuation school. The principals at all the District's
schools are involved directly in the hiring, firing, disciplining
and evaluating of employees in their particular school. The
principal acts as the first level in a grievance dispute and
is thus in a position to adjust grievances filed by
employees.
In Fremont Unified School District, EERB Decision No. 6
(December 16, 1976), the Board held that "employer-employee
relations", as that term is used in the definition of a
confidential employee in section 3540.l(c), includes the
processing of grievances and participation in the negotiations
process.
In the instant case, the principals' involvement in
negotiations is de minimus. If a particular subject is being
discussed during negotiations that involves a certain school,
the principal from that school is asked to present his or her
views on the matter. The principals do not participate in
negotiations on a regular on-going basis.
With respect to the processing of grievances, the principals'
involvement in the processing of grievances is at the first level.
It is noted that in Fremont, supra the position in dispute, who was
found to be confidential, was the secretary to the assistant super-
intendent of personnel. This is a significant difference. Processing
grievances at the district level often involves preparing a
detailed and extensive written response to the grievant, the
-5-

preparation of which is highly confidential; whereas writing a
response to a grievance at the first level rarely involves
the preparation of confidential materials.
The evidence with respect to the Centinela Valley Union
High School District's grievance procedure, the various levels,
the involvement of the principals and of higher level district
administrators in preparing a response to a grievance was scant.
Based on the evidence presented, it is found that the principals
and their secretaries do not participate in the processing
of grievances at a level which would involve the preparation
of confidential written statements or documents. Accordingly, .
the secretary to the principal is not a confidential employee
within the meaning of the Act.
Secretary to the Director of the Continuation School
The evidence adduced at the hearing indicates that the
director of the continuation school is actually a principal
and has all the duties, functions and responsibilities of a
principal.
Therefore, based on the above discussion, it is found that
the secretary to the director of the continuation school is not
a confidential employee.
Secretary to the Assistant Principal
All schools in the District except the continuation school
employ assistant principals. The number of assistant principals
varies; some schools have three, others two and one school has
none. The assistant principals perform various functions
relating to curriculum, instruction, student management and
internal business matters.
-6-

There was testimony offered which indicates that the
assistant principals perform the functions of a principal
when the principal is away from the school. Thus, an
assistant principal is involved in the processing of grievances,
but only when the principal is absent.
Having found the secretary to the principal not to be a
confidential employee it follows that the secretary to the assistant
principal also is not a confidential employee.
Secretary to the Director of Career Education
The director of career education works in several areas,
such as the District's work experience program, CETA program,
vocational education program, and coordinates the counselor's
work in the schools. There are approximately 18 employees under
the director's supervision.
The testimony with respect to the director's secretary
centered around the fact the secretary has access to the
director's files, which contain information regarding the
budgetary considerations of the above-listed program. The
secretary also types evaluations of the employees under the
director's supervision.
Access to employees' evaluations and information relating
to the budgets of various school district programs, however,
are not confidential information within the meaning of the term
"employer-employee relations". It is found that the secretary
to the director of career education is not a confidential
employee within the meaning of the Act.
-7-

Secretary to the Director of Special Projects
The director of special projects coordinates all federal
and state education projects in which the District is involved
and handles all communications regarding the funding of such
projects.
The director's secretary handles all mail addressed to the
director and maintains the files. There was testimony that the
secretary has access to information relating to the budgets of
the funded programs. Additionally, the secretary to the director
has access to evaluations of employees under the director's
jurisdiction.
The above duties of the secretary to the director of special
projects are similar to the secretary to the director of
career education. The secretary to the director of special
projects, however, performs one function which/decidedly
distinguishes this secretarial position. The secretary to the
director of special projects sits in on management negotiating
meetings and takes minutes of such meetings. The secretary to
the director of special projects thus has information relating
to the employer's negotiating position and strategies.
To summarize the Board in Sierra Sands, supra, individuals
who possess information on matters "that if made public pre-
maturely might jeopardize the employer's ability to negotiate
with employees from an equal posture" should be considered
confidential employees.
-8-

The secretary to the director of special projects is a
confidential employee within the meaning of the Act.
PBX/File Clerk
The PBX/file clerk is supervised by the assistant super-
intendent for business services. The PBX/file clerk files all
employee evaluations in the District and distributes all the District's
mail and thus has "access" to mail which may contain the employer's
contract offers and negotiating strategies.
It is found that the PBX/file clerk's "access" to matters
relating to the employer's employer-employee relations is not
the type of "access" the Legislature had in mind in
Section 3540.l(c). The PBX/file clerk merely transmits and
distributes the correspondence. There was no testimony that the
PBX/file clerk is required to open all communications, read
the contents, and then make the appropriate distribution.
The PBX/file clerk does not actually possess, as a regular
part of the clerk's duties, information relating to employer-
employee relations, and therefore is not a confidential
employee within the meaning of the Act.
Payroll Clerk
The District currently employs two payroll clerks. The
payroll clerks have access to all personnel files. The assistant
superintendent of business services testified that the payroll
clerks prepare all employee payroll information which is then
used in negotiations. Additionally, the payroll clerks have
access to health and welfare costs for the District and they
often prepare the costs of various fringe benefit proposals.
-9-

The mechanical preparation of costs for fringe and salary-
proposals is even less than the work performed by employees
in Sierra Sands, supra, who were found not to be confidential
employees. Nothing in the record demonstrates that the payroll
clerk regularly performs duties that would be considered
confidential within the meaning of the Act. The payroll clerks
are not confidential employees within the meaning of the Act.
Duplicating Clerk
The evidence with respect to the duplicating clerk was
scant. The duplicating clerk operates the duplicating machine
and in the course of performing this function has access to
information such as memoranda relating to budgetary matters.
There was little evidence introduced which indicates the
duplicating clerk performs duties or has access to matters
considered "confidential" within the meaning of the Act.
The duplicating clerk is not a confidential employee
within the definition of Government Code Section 3540.l(c).
Word Processing Clerk
The District employs two word processing clerks. These
clerks type all correspondence, letters and memoranda which
are dictated by counselors and management personnel. There was
evidence that the word processing clerks may be called upon to
type contract proposals or notes from a member of the District's
negotiating team, but only if this information has been
dictated. There was no evidence, however, that the District
intended to dictate its negotiations materials and correspondence,
-10-

It does not appear from the record that the word processing
clerks, in the regular course of their duties, possess
information relating to the employer's employer-employee
relations.
The word processing clerks are not confidential employees
within the meaning of the Act.
Secretary to the Director of English as a Second Language Program
The director of E.S.L. has been designated by the District
as management employee, but is not on the District's negotiating
team. Thus, the director's secretary does not have access to,
as a regular part of the secretary's duties, confidential
matters relating to employer-employee relations.
The secretary to the director of English as a second
language is not a confidential employee within the meaning
of the Act.
Secretary to the Purchasing Agent
The purchasing agent employed by the District is responsible
for all purchases made by the District. The purchasing agent
supervises all the employees in the purchasing and storage
department.
The purchasing agent is a member of the District's
negotiating team and thus is involved in preparing contract
proposals and negotiating strategies. The purchasing agent's
secretary types all communications regarding such information
and therefore has access to, or possesses information relating
to the employer's employer-employee relations.
-11-

The secretary to the purchasing agent is a confidential
employee within the meaning of the Act.
Secretary to the Director of Maintenance and Operations
The director of maintenance and operations coordinates
all maintenance work throughout the District.
The District has selected the director of maintenance and
operations to be on the District's negotiating team and thus the
director is involved in all contract proposals and negotiating
strategies prepared by the team. The director's secretary
types all correspondence regarding such information and there-
fore has access to, or possesses information relating to, the
employer's employer-employee relations.
It is noted that the director's secretary at the present
time is an officer of the employee organization involved in this
case. This situation existed in Fremont, supra, and the Board
did not consider this to be a relevant factor.
The secretary to the director of maintenance and operations
is a confidential employee within the meaning of the Act.
PROPOSED DECISION
It is the proposed decision that:
1. The following unit is appropriate for the purpose of
meeting and negotiating, providing an employee organization
becomes the exclusive representative: all classified employees
of the Centinela Valley Union High School District, excluding
management, supervisory, and confidential employees.
2. The following positions are confidential: secretary to
the director of special projects, secretary to the purchasing
-12-

agent, 	and 	secretary 	to 	the 	director 	of maintenance 	and
operations.
3 . 	The 	following 	positions 	are 	not 	confidential : 	secretary
to 	the 	principal, 	secretary 	to 	the 	director 	of 	continuation
school, 	secretary 	to 	the 	assistant 	principal, 	secretary to 	the
director 	of 	career 	education, 	secretary 	to 	the 	director 	of 	the
English as 	a 	second 	language 	program; 	word processing 	clerk,
duplicating 	clerk, 	payroll 	clerk, 	and PBX/file 	clerk .
The 	parties 	have 	seven 	calendar 	days 	from 	receipt 	of 	this
proposed 	decision 	in which 	to 	file 	exceptions 	in 	accordance 	with
Section 	33380 	of 	the 	Rules 	and Regulations. 	If no 	party 	files
timely 	exceptions, 	this 	proposed 	decision will 	become 	a 	final
order 	of 	the 	Board on July 	19,1977 	and 	a 	Notice 	of 	Decision
will 	issue 	fro m the 	Board .
Within 	10 workdays 	after 	the 	employer 	posts 	the 	Notice 	of
Decision 	the 	employee 	organization 	shall 	demonstrate 	to 	the
Regional 	Director 	at 	least 	30 	percent 	support 	in 	the 	above 	unit .
The 	Regional 	Director 	shall 	conduct 	an 	election 	at 	the 	erid 	of
the 	posting period 	if 	(1) 	more 	than 	one 	employee 	organization
qualifies 	for 	the 	ballot, 	or 	(2) 	only 	one 	employee 	organiza-
tion 	qualifies 	for 	the 	ballot 	and 	the 	e mployer 	does 	not 	grant
voluntary 	recognition .
D a t e: 	July 	8, 	1977
-13-
Jeff 	Paule
Hearing 	Officer