Regents of the University of California and University of California Association of Interns and Residents (California Association of Interns and Residents) (PERB A288H)

STATE 	OF	
CALIFORNIA
DECISION
	OF THE
PUBLIC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELATIONS
	BOARD
REGENTS
	OF 	THE
	UNIVERSITY
	OF
CALIFORNIA,
Employer,
and
UNIVERSITY
	OF
	CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION
	OF
	INTERNS
	AND
RESIDENTS 	(CAIR),
Petitioner.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
------------------)
Case
	No.
	SF-PC-1052-H
Motion
	for
	Stay
PERB
	Order
	No. 	Ad-288-H
March 	24, 	1998
Appearances:	
Cochran-Bond	
& Connon
	by
Walter
	Cochran-Bond,
Attorney,
	for
	Regents
	of 	the 	University 	of
	California;
	Law
Offices
	of
	Robert
	J.
	Bezemek
	by Robert
	J.
	Bezemek,
	Attorney,
	forUniversity
	of
	California
	Association 	of
	Interns
	and
	Residents
(CAIR) .
Before 	Caffrey,
	Chairman; 	Dyer 	and
	Jackson,
	Members.
DECISION
CAFFREY,
	Chairman:
	This
	case
	is
	before 	the 	Public
Employment
	Relations
	Board
	(PERB
	or
	Board) 	on
	a
	request
	by
	the
Regents 	of 	the 	University 	of
	California
	(University)
	that 	the
Board
	stay 	the 	proceedings
	in
	Case
	No.
	SF-PC-1052-H.
On
	February
	13.,
	1996,
	the 	University 	of 	California
Association 	of 	Interns
	and
	Residents
	(CAIR}
	filed
	with
	PERB
	a
petition
	for
	certification
	seeking
	a
	systemwide
	unit
	of
	all
housestaff
	at
	the 	University's 	five
	campuses
	having medical
centers.
	On
	April
	3, 	1996,
	PERB
	determined
	that 	the
	showing 	of
support 	submitted with 	the
	petition
	was
	sufficient 	to
	meet
	the

requirements 	of
	PERE
	Regulation
	51100(b)
. 1 The
	University
opposed
	the
	petition
	on
	several
	grounds.
	The
	parties
	submitted
	a
stipulation
	agreeing
	to 	delete
	certain
	housestaff
	positions
	from
the
	petition,
	and
	agreeing
	that
	campuswide
	rather
	than
	systemwide
units
	would
	be
	appropriate
	if
	housestaff
	were
	found
	to
	be
employees
	under
	the
	Hig~er
	Education
	Employer-Employee
	Relations
Act
	(HEERA)
. 2
On
	January
	21, 	1998,
	a
	PERE
	administrative
	law
	judge
	issued
a
	proposed
	decision 	finding
	that 	certain
	housestaff 	are
	employees
under
	HEERA
while
	other 	housestaff 	are
	not,
	and
	finding
	that
campuswide
	units 	are 	appropriate 	for
	bargaining.
	Pursuant
	to
PERB
	Regulation
	32300,
	the
	parties
	were
	provided
	20
	days 	from
	the
date 	of 	service
	of 	the
	proposed
	decision 	to
	file
	a
	statement 	of
exceptions.
On
	January
	28, 	1998,
	the 	University
	filed
	the
	instant
request 	for
	a
	stay 	in
	the
	proceedings.
	The
	University
	asserts
that
	CAIR
	is
	experiencing
	an
	internal
	dispute
	which
	has
	left
unresolved 	the 	question 	of
	who
	represents
	CAIR
	in
	Case
No. 	SF-PC-1052-H. 	The
	University
	asserts 	that:
If
	it
	remains 	unresolved
	who
	represents
	CAIR,
it
	will
	not
	be
	clear
	who
	has 	the
responsibility
	and
	the
	right 	to
	file
exceptions
	on
	behalf 	of 	the
	petitioner
	and/or
to
	respond
	to 	exceptions,
	if
	any, 	taken
	by
the 	University.
	And,
	if
	both
	CAIR
	factions
file
	exceptions, 	the 	University will 	not 	beon
	notice
	which
	exceptions
	must 	be 	opposed.
1
PERB
	regulations 	are 	codified at 	California
	Code
	of
Regulations,
	title
	8,
	section
	31001
	et
	seq.
2
HEERA
	is 	codified at
	Government 	Code
	section
	3560
	et 	seq.
2

The
	University
	asks
	that
	a
	stay
	remain
	in 	effect
	"until
	PERE
identifies
	one
	or 	the
	other 	faction
	as
	representing
	the
petitioner
	in
	this
	proceeding."
After
	reviewing
	the
	University's
	request, 	the
	Board
concludes
	that
	it
	would
	not
	further
	the
	purposes
	of
	HEERA
	to 	stay
the
	proceedings
	in
	Case
	No. 	SF-PC-1052-H
	at 	this
	time.
ORDER
The
	request
	by
	the
	Regents
	of
	the 	University 	of
	California
that
	the
	Board
	stay
	the
	proceedings
	in
	Case 	No. 	SF-PC-1052-H
	is
DENIED.
Pursuant
	to 	California
	Code
	of 	Regulations,
	title
	8,
section
	32305,
	the
	Proposed
	Decision
	and
	Order
	issued
	in
	Case
No. 	SF-PC-1052-H 	on
	January
	21, 	1998,
	shall
	become
	final
	unless
	a
party
	files
	a
	statement 	of 	exceptions 	with 	the
	Board
	itself
	at
the 	headquarters
	office 	in
	Sacramento
	within
	20
	days
	of
	the 	date
of
	service
	of
	this
	Decision. 	In
	accordance 	with
	PERB
Regulations, 	the 	statement 	of 	exceptions 	should
	identify
	by page
citation
	or 	exhibit
	number
	the 	portions
	of 	the 	record,
	if
	any,
relied
	upon
	for
	such
	exceptions.
	(See
	Cal.
	Code
	Regs.,
	tit.
	8,
sec.
	32300.)
	A document
	is
	considered
	"filed"
	when
	actually
received 	before 	the 	close
	of 	business
	(5:00 	p.m.)
	on
	the
	last
	day
set 	for
	filing"·
	..
	or
	when
	sent
	by
	telegraph 	or
	certified
	or
Express 	United
	States 	mail, 	postmarked not
	later
	than 	the
	last
day
	set 	for 	filing."
	(See
	Cal.
	Code
	Regs.,
	tit.
	8,
sec.
	32135; 	Code 	Civ. 	Proc., 	sec.
	1013
	shall 	apply.)
	Any
statement 	of 	exceptions 	and 	supporting brief
	must 	be 	served
3

concurrently with 	its 	filing 	upon 	each 	party 	to 	this 	proceeding.
Proof 	of 	service 	shall 	accompany 	each 	copy 	served 	on a 	party 	or
filed 	with 	the 	Board 	itself. 	(See 	Cal. 	Code 	Regs., 	tit. 	8,
secs. 	32300, 	32305 	and 	32140.)
Members 	Dyer and 	Jackson 	joined 	in 	this 	Decision.
4