Los Gatos Joint Union High School District (Blakiston) (PERB A069E)

STATE
	OF
	CALIFORNIA
DECISION
	OF
	THE
PUBLIC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELATIONS
	BOARD
LOS 	GATOS
	JOINT
	UNION 	HIGH
	SCHOOL
	DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
SERVICE
	EMPLOYEES
	INTERNATIONAL
	UNION,
LOCAL
	715,
	AFL-CIO,
Employee
	Organization,
APPELLANT,
and
MS.
	ELEANOR
	BLAKISTON,
Petitioner.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
}
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case
	No.
	SF-D-35
(SF-R-23)
PERB
	Order
	No. 	Ad-69
Administrative
	Appeal
July
	6, 	1979
Appearances: 	Alison
	Mackenzie,
	Attorney 	(Paterson	
&	
Taggart)
for
	Los 	Gatos
	Joint
	Union 	High
	School
	District;
	Robert
	Bezemek,
Attorney
	(Van
	Bourg,
	Allen,
	Weinberg._& 	Roger)
	for 	Service
Employees
	International
	Union,
	Local 	715,
	AFL-CIO: 	Ms.
	Eleanor
Blakiston 	in
	Pro
	Per.
Before 	Gluck,
	Chairperson;
	Gonzales
	and 	Moore, 	Members.
DECISION
This 	case
	is
	before 	the 	Public
	Employment
	Relations
	Board
(hereafter
	PERB
	or
	Board)
	on 	an
	appeal
	by
	the 	Service
	Employees
International
	Union, 	Local 	715,
	AFL-CIO
	(hereafter
	SEIU) 	from 	a
decision
	by
	the
	San
	Francisco 	Regional 	Director
	denying 	SEIU's
request 	for
	a
	"unit 	determination 	hearing"
	after
	a
	rival
employee 	group
	filed
	a
	decertification 	petition
	in 	the
	Los
Gatos 	Union 	High 	School
	District 	(hereafter 	District).
FACTS
In
	December 	1977, 	SEIU 	was
	certified
	as 	the 	exclusive
representative 	for 	classified
	employees 	in 	the 	District.

SEIU's
	certification
	applied 	to
	a
	unit
	that
	had
	been
	agreed
	to
earlier
	in
	1977 	by 	SEIU,
	the
	California
	School
	Employees
Association
	and
	the
	District.
	In
	March
	1979,
	certain
classified
	employees
	signed
	and
	filed
	a
	decertification
petition,
	seeking
	to 	oust
	SEIU. 	The 	San
	Francisco
	Regional
Director
	gave
	the
	petitioners
	an
	opportunity 	to
	perfect
	the
showing
	of 	support.
	This
	was
	done
	in
	April.
	While
	the
decertification 	efforts
	were
	taking
	place,
	SEIU
	filed
	an
	unfair
practice
	charge
	against
	the
	District,
	claiming
	that
	unlawful
supervisory
	and/or 	managerial
	involvement 	occured
	in 	connection
with
	gathering 	signatures 	for 	the
	decertification 	effort.
	The
regional
	director
	has
	decided
	to
	block
	any
	election
	pending
	the
outcome
	of
	this
	unfair
	practice
	case.
	A
hearing
	on
	the
	unfair
practice
	charge
	took
	place 	in
	May
	197-9,
	but
	no
	proposed
decision
	has
	issued
	as
	yet.
On
	the
	day 	SEIU
	filed
	the
	unfair 	practice
	charge,
	it
	also
requested
	a
	hearing
	to
	determine 	the 	appropriate 	bargaining
unit 	in
	order 	to
	ascertain
	voter
	eligibility 	if
	an
	election
	is
ultimately 	held.
	The
	regional
	director
	denied 	the 	request
	on
the 	ground
	that
	the 	previous 	consent
	election
	agreement
	had
established
	the 	unit
	sought 	in 	the
	decertification 	petition,
and
	that
	a
	further 	hearing
	was
	not 	necessary.
On
	appeal 	to 	this
	Board 	from
	the 	regional
	director's 	denial
of
	its
	request,
	SEIU
	contends
	that 	various 	facts
	brought 	out
	at
the
	May 	1979
	unfair 	practice
	hearing 	support 	SEIU's
	request 	for
a
	hearing:
	first,
	that 	certain
	persons 	signing 	the
	petition
were 	not 	actually
	employed 	in 	the 	unit 	in 	the 	relevant 	time
2

period:
	second,
	that
	the
	regional
	director
	used
	an
	incorrect
employee
	list
	to
	make
	his
	determination 	of
	sufficient
	showing
of
	interest;
	and,
	third, 	that
	employer
	interference
	and
petition
	defects
	rendered 	unlawful
	the
	decertification
	effort.
SEIU
	asks
	that
	the
	case
	be
	sent
	back
	to
	the 	regional
	director
for 	re-computation 	of 	the
	showing
	of
	interest,
	and
	that
	he
defer
	any
	finding
	on
	the
	sufficiency
	of 	the
	showing
	until
	the
unfair 	practice
	case
	is
	decided.
DISCUSSION
The
	determination 	of 	the
	sufficiency 	of
	a
	decertification
petition 	is,
	in
	the
	first
	instance, 	within
	the 	province 	of 	the
regional
	director.
	California
	Administrative
	Code,
	title
	8,
sections
	33240 	and 	33250.
	The
	regional
	director's
'---
ad
minis
tr
at
iv
e
	authority 	also
	extends
	to
	the
	election
	process
itself.
	Id.,
	section
	33460,
	et
	seq.
	Of
	course,
	parties
	to
	an
election
	may
	challenge 	voters
	as
	ineligible
	to
	participate
(id.,
	section
	33560) 	and 	may
	file
	objections 	to 	the 	conduct
	of
the
	election
	(id.,
	section
	33580),
	including
	conduct
	that 	is
tantamount
	to
	an
	unfair 	practice 	(id.,
	section
	33590).
Given
	the
	forthcoming
	unfair 	practice 	decision, 	the 	blocked
election,
	the 	other
	avenues
	of
	potential 	relief
	for 	the 	claims
presented
	by 	SEIU, 	and
	the
	absence 	of 	evidence
	showing 	any
abdication 	of 	responsibility
	by
	the 	regional 	director
	or 	any
substantial 	prejudice 	suffered
	by 	SEIU,
	the 	regional
	director's
decision 	should
	be
	sustained.
3

ORDER
For
	the
	foregoing
	reasons, 	the
	Board
	sustains
	the
	decision
of
	the 	regional
	director
	denying 	SEIU's
	request
	for
	a
	"unit
determination 	hearing".
	SEIU's-appeal
	is
	denied.
By:'
/Harry1~uck,
	Chairperson
,.
......
-~-~-
Barbara
	D.
	Moore, 	Member
4

STATE
OF
CALIFORNIA
PUBLJC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELAT~ONS BOARD
--2rt
Francisco Regional Office
7 Post
St.~
9th Floor
San
Frcnc:isco,
California 	94108
(415) 557-1350
May
21,
	1979	
Certified
Mail
Return
Receipt
Requested
Los
Gatos
	Joint
Union High School
District
P.
	O.
	Box 1257
Los
Gatos,
	California
	95030
Ms.
	Alison
C.
	Mackenzie
Paterson
&
Taggart
1570 The Al.ameda
San,
Jose, 	California
	95126
Service
Employees
	International
Un.i0t1
Local
715
2131 The Alameda
San
Jose, 	California
Mr.
	Robert
J.
	Bezemek
Van
Bourg,
Allen,
	Weinberg & Roger
45
Polk
	Street
San Fra.nci~co,
	California
	94102
Ms.
	Eleanor Blakiston
-
P. 	O
..
	Box 1257
Los
Gatos,
	California
	95030
EOMUND
0.
aROWN
JR.,
Go,...rnor
Re:
	Los Gatos
Joint
Union High School
District
Case
No.
	SF-D-35 	(R-23)
Dear
Interested Parties:
On March 7, 	1979
	this office
received
a
decertification petition
	for
	a
classified unit of
the
Los Gatos Union High School
District.
	The
petition
was
	dated
March
6,
	1979, 	and was
	f~led
by
Eleanor Blakiston.
	Ms.
	Blakiston
was
contacted by	
this office
and
notified that
	the
petition
was
	defective
because
:i.t
did not include
a
proof of
service of
all
the
parties
	and
because
it
	lacked information required by
§33240
	of the
FERB
Rules and
Regulations.
proper
procedure
	for
	filing
a
decertification petition
was
	discussed
	and	The
on March 12, 1979, 	a second
decertification petition
was
	received
in
	the
regional office.
	Proof of support
was
	included with the second
decertifica-
tion petition.
The showing
of
interest
	submitted
in
support of the
March
6th
and March
	12th
decertification petitions
was
	in the form of
	t;,;vo
signature petitions.
	The
first 	petition
was dated February 28, 	1979. 	The statement on the
petition
itself
read as follows:
"ill it
	takes are 30 signatures to receive a
	7%
	raise.
	We
	can then
force another election and decertify
	U715
	as our exclusive representa-
tive and represent ourselves."

May
21.,
	1.979
Los
Gatos
	Joint
Union High
School
District
Paterson
	and
Taggart
Service
	Employees
	International
Union
Local
715
Van Bourg~
	Allen,
	Weinberg & Roger
Ms.
	Eleanor Blakiston
Page 2
None
of
	the signatures
	on
	this petition
were
dated~
T'.he
second
signature
petition
was
	dated
March
1,
	1979,
	and
read
	as
	follows:
"At
	least
	30
percent of the
employes
	in
the established
unit
no
	longer
desire
	to
be
	represented
by
the
	incumbent
Local
1715
as
	their
exclusive
representative."
All
of
	the signatures
	on
the
second
petition
were
	dated. 	All but
	two
	of
	the
employees
	signing the
	first
	petition
had
signed
	the
	second
petition.
Prior to
March
30,
	1979,
Mso
	Blakiston
was
contacted by
this
	office
and
	told
that the
	sign'ature
petition
dated
February 28,
	1979
	could
not
be counted
because
	it
failed to
	demonstrate
that
	the
	employees
signing the
petition.
either:
	1)
·no
longer
desired to
be
represented by the
incumbent
exclusive
representative; 	or
2) wished
to
be
represented by another
employee
organization
as
	required
by
Section
33240(c1
	of the
Rules
	and
Regulations.
Ms.
	:Slakiston
was
	also notified that
the signature
petitions
could
not
be
counted because
none
	ef
	the signatures
were
dated.
At
	the
	same
time Ms.-Balkiston
was
notified 	that
	the
	language
of the
second
signature
petition
dated
March
1st
was
questionable.
	although
no
determination
as
	to
its
validity
had been
made
at
	that
time.	
Ms. _Blak.iston was
	told
	that,
if
desired, 	there
was
	time
to perfect
her
showing
of support
by
filing
a:a.other
petition
,;.'"!th
the required
language
	of
	§33240(c) 	on
	the
petition.
On
April
3,
	1979,
	the regional office
received
a
	third
	showing
of support
signature petition.
from Ms.
	Blakiston..
	The showing was
	dated
March
27,
	1979
and
contained the following language:
"We,	
the undersigned,
	no
longer
desire to
be
	represented
by
	the
incumbent
SEIU
Local
/1715
	as
	our
exclusive representative."
All
of 	the signatures
were
individually dated.
Investigation of
	this matter has
	also established the following
	facts:
l)	
The
	current exclusive representative
	of the unit in question
	is
Service
Employees
	International
Union, 	Local #715, which was
certified
	on December 14, 	1977.
2)	
No
written agreement
	currently exists
between the exclusive
representative
	and the employer.

C)
May
21,
	1979
Los
	Gatos
	Joint
Union High School
District
Paterson
&
Taggart
Service
Employees
	International
Union
Local
715
Van
Bourg,
	Allen,
	Weinberg & Roger
Ms.
	Eleanor Blakiston
Page 3
,,.-
I
·.:-_:.._;.,)
The
	limitations
expressed
in
§332SO(b)
	of
	the
PERB
Rules
-and
Regulations
do
not
	exist
in this
	case. 	Therefore, 	the
decertification petition
of
March
12,
1979
	is
	timely
filed.
Review
of
	the
	showing
of
support submitted
by
Ms.
	Blakiston
in
support
of
the
decertification petition
has
resulted
in
the
following
administrative
determinations:
1)	
The
language
of the April 3,
	1979
signatur.e
petition clearly
indicates that
	those
	signing the
petition
no
	longer
desired
to
be
re-presented
by
the
	incumbent
exclusive
representative.
Review
of the support
also indicates 	that
	at least
	30%
of the
employees
in
the
unit
signed
	the
petition.
	The
April 3,
	1979
showing
of support
is
	therefore
sufficient
	to
meet
	the
require-
ment·s
of
	§33240(c)
	of the
P'E'RB
Rules and
Regulations.
2)	
It is
unnecessary
	to
rule
upon the.
sufficiency
of
-the March
1st
showing
of support
petition in light
	of
	the
sufficiency
of
	the
April
3rd PE:_tition.
3)	
The
s&owiiig
of
	sup-port
petition
dated
February 28th
is
	inadequate
because
	it
did not
	indicate·
that
	the
employees
	either
no
	longer
desire to
be
represented
by
	the
	incumbent
exclusive
representative
or
wish
to
be
represented
by
another
employee
organization.	
·The
showing
is
also
inadequate- because
the individual signatures
were
not dated.
On March 12, 	1979,	
by
way
of
a
	letter
from Robert Bezemek, 	SEIU,
	Local
715
requested
a
hearing to
determine
	the appropriate bargaining
unit
so
	that
they might
ascertain
who
	is
eligible to
vote
	if
an
election
is
ultimately
held.
	A
review of the
file
	shows
	that
	the current unit
was
	established
on March
1,
	1977, when SEIU,
	Local
/1715,
	the
	emp-loyer, 	and
	the
California
School
Employees
Association entered
into
·a
consent
election
agreement.
In
light
of the fact 	that
the
decertification petition is
	seeking to
decertify that
same
unit
	I
	find that
	a
unit
determination hearing
is
	not
appropriate
and
	therfore
deny
	the request.
By way
	of the
	same March 12, 	1979
	letter
mentioned above and
by
an
unfair
practice
charge
filed
by SEIU, 	Local #713 on March 13, 	1979 	(SF-CE-348)
the exclusive representative
has
	raised
a
	question of supervisory and/or
managerial involvement or inducement
	in the circulation of 	the
	decertifi-
cation petition. 	In that
	a formal hearing has been scheduled for 	the unfair
practice
	charge 	for
May
	23, 	1979, 	I
	will defer ruling
	on
	that issue to
the hearing officer.
	The
	unfair practice charge will block any
decertifi-
cation election from being held until
it is
resolved or waived by the
charging party. 	I will issue a directed election order
if 	it is
	found 	to
be appropriate at 	that time.

May
	21,
	1979
Los
Gatos
	Joint
Union Righ
School
District
Paterson
&
Taggart
Service
Employees
	International
Union
Local
	715
Van
Bourg,
	Allen,
	Weinberg & Roger
Ms.
	Eleanor Blakiston
Page 4
CONCLUSIONS
1)	
The
decertification petition
dated
March 7, 	1979
is
dismissed
for failure to
	serve
all
	the
parties
pursuant to
	§33240(d)
	of
the
PERB
Rules and
Regulations.
2) 	The
decertification petition
dated
March
12,
	1979
is
valid
and
is
	timely
filed.
3) 	The showing
of support
petition
dated
February
28, 	1979
is
dismissed.
4) 	The showing
of
	support
petition
dated
April
3,
	1979
	is
sufficient
	to
meet
	the
requirements
	of
	§33240(c)
	of
	the
PERB
Rules and
Regulations.
5)	
SEIU
Local 715's
request for
	a uq~t
determination hearing
is
deniede
6) 	The
questiou of
supervisory
and/or managerial involvement
or
inducement
in
the
circulation
of 	the decertificat:i.on
petition
is
def
erred to
::the
hearing
officer in
the
u.nf ai.r
practice
case
No.
	SF-CE-348 •
. An
appeal of
	this
	decision
may be made
	to
	the
Board
itself
within
10
calendar
days
	of
	service of
	this
	letter
by
filing
	a
	statement of
	the
facts
	upon which
the appeal
is
based with the
Executive
Assistant to 	the
Board
at
923
12th
Street,
	Suite
201, 	Sacramento,
	California
	958l4.
Copies
	of
any
appeal
must be
co~currently served
upon
	all
parties
	and
	the
San
Fr
	PS FOl'llt
	A • 	-
...
1
	Office.
	P1:oof
	of service
of the appeal
must be
3800
f
:iled
	, Pr. 1976
v·
• 	I 	G
~	
-I
~
a.me
	.....
	'
Regif 	N
~
.JWTI
	....._..
I