California State University, Chico (O'Connell, Johnson, et al.) (PERB 0729HA)

STATE 	OP 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION OP 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
MARTHA MAIRE O'CONNELL, 	KEVIN
JOHNSON AND KRISTEN WIGREN,
Charging Parties,
v.
THE 	CALIFORNIA STATE 	UNIVERSITY,
CHICO,
Respondent.
)
) 	Case No. 	SF-CE-271-H
Request 	for Reconsideration
PERB Decision No. 	729-H
PERB Decision No. 	729a-H
August 	21, 	1989
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	William B. 	Haughton, 	Attorney, 	for the California
State University, 	Chico.
Before Hesse, 	Chairperson; 	Shank and Camilli, 	Members.
DECISION
CAMILLI, 	Member: 	The California State University, 	Chico
(CSU) 	requests reconsideration of PERB Decision No. 	729, 	issued
by 	the 	Public 	Employment Relations 	Board 	(PERB 	or Board) 	on
April 	14, 	1989. 	Specifically, 	CSU requests that the Board only
reconsider 	its 	finding of 	CSU's 	discriminatory 	and 	inconsistent
application 	of 	the 	verification 	requirement which 	resulted 	in 	the
Board's 	finding of 	a violation of 	the Higher Education Employer-
Employee Relations Act 	(HEERA or Act) 	section 357l(b)1.
1HEERA 	is 	codified at Government Code 	section 	3560 	et 	seq.
Unless 	otherwise 	indicated, 	all 	statutory references 	are 	to the
Government Code.
Section 3571 provides, 	in pertinent part:
It 	shall 	be unlawful 	for the higher education
employer to:

In its 	request 	for reconsideration, 	CSU argues 	that 	evidence
that 	an employee 	organization at 	San Jose 	State 	University was
permitted 	to 	use 	the 	internal 	campus 	mail 	system without
complying with 	the verification requirement under Title 	5 	of 	the
California Administrative Code, 	section 437102 is 	insufficient to
(b) 	Deny to 	employee organizations 	rights
guaranteed 	to 	them by 	this 	chapter.
2California Administrative Code, 	Title 5, 	section 43710,
states:
Verification of 	Employer Organizations.
Each 	employee 	organization which desires 	to
represent 	campus 	employees 	shall 	be required
to 	furnish the Office 	of 	the Chancellor at
the 	time 	of 	initial 	verification and
subsequently between October 	1 	and 	15 	of each
year, 	a written statement containing:
(a) 	The name and addresses 	of the employee
organization's 	principal 	officers 	and all
representatives 	who 	are 	authorized to
represent the organization, 	specifying to
which campus(s) 	each officer's 	and
representative's 	authority applies.
(b) 	The names 	and addresses 	of the employee
organization's 	principal 	officers 	and 	all
representatives 	who 	are 	authorized 	to
represent the organization, 	specifying to
which campus(s) 	each officer's 	and
representative's 	authority 	applies.
(c) 	A description of the 	employee
classifications 	the 	employee 	organization 	is
seeking to represent.
(d) 	A copy of 	the Constitution and By-laws
of the organization, 	its parent body, 	if any,
and its affiliates, 	if any.
(e) 	A 	statement that one of the
organization's purposes 	is 	the 	representation
of CSU employees 	concerning, 	in whole or in
part, grievances, labor disputes, wages,
22

prove 	inconsistent 	or discriminatory 	application of 	the
verification requirement by CSU. 	This 	argument 	is well 	taken.
As 	there 	is 	no 	evidence 	that CSU applied the verification
requirement 	in an inconsistent 	or discriminatory 	fashion, 	or that
the 	administration at one 	campus 	would 	necessarily have 	knowledge
of the policies being implemented at another campus, 	including
the 	enforcement 	or non-enforcement 	of 	the verification
requirement, 	the Board agrees with CSU that 	its 	finding of 	a
violation of 	section 	3571(b) 	based on an 	inconsistent 	or
discriminatory 	application of 	the 	verification requirement 	is
improper. 	However, 	the Board's 	findings 	that the imposition of a
$20 	distribution 	fee 	constituted 	an unreasonable 	regulation 	in
violation of 	section 	3571(b) 	and that Concerned Employees' 	flyer
did not 	constitute a 	"letter" 	under the 	federal postal
regulations 	are upheld.
ORDER
The 	Board hereby MODIFIES 	PERB Decision No. 	729-H 	consistent
with the 	above discussion. 	Such modification does 	not 	alter the
Order in PERB Decision No. 	729-H.
Chairperson Hesse 	and Member 	Shank 	joined 	in this 	Decision.
hours, 	and other terms and conditions 	of
employment of 	employees.
Employee 	organizations 	shall 	promptly 	amend
these written 	statements 	during 	each year 	as
changes 	occur. 	The Office of the Chancellor
will 	notify 	each 	campus 	of the 	filings
concerning the 	campus.
W	
3