College Name: COLLEGE OF THE CANYONS 
Mailing Address: 26455 ROCKWELL CANYON R 
VALENCIA , CA  91355 

College Web Address: http://www.coc.cc.ca.us/ 
District: SANTA CLARITA CCD District Phone: (661) 259-7800x3427 
JobLine: (661) 259-7800x3427 

Job Position: ADJUNCT - ALL DISCIPLINES 
Job Description: ADJUNCT FACULTY - ALL SUBJECT AREAS 

Comments: 

Job Classification: FACULTY                                                             Contract Terms: PART TIME POOL 
Job Qualifications: CONTACT DISTRICT 
Starting Salary Min: $43 HR LAB                                                          Starting Salary Max: $43 HR LEC 
Application Closing Date: CONT Job Start Date: UK 

California Community Colleges Registry                                                                   Send Email comments and/or questions regarding 
c/o Yosemite Community College District                                                                                        The Registry to the Project Director.
P.O. Box 4065 
Modesto, California 95352-4065 USA 
(209) 579-0840 

Re: Public Employment Relations Board v. Santa Clarita 
Community College District
Case No. BC 268742

Dear Judge Person, 

We write on behalf of Part-Time Faculty United of the American Federation of Teachers (the AFT), the union that is the charging party in the administrative proceeding that underlies the injunction proceeding referred to above. We write to support the request of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) that the injunction issued in this matter in March 2002 be extended to remain in effect until March 23, 2003 or issuance of a final administrative decision in this matter, whichever is earlier.

The Defendant Santa Clara Community College District's stated reasons for opposing extension of the injunction rely on an inaccurate reading of the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA) and PERB hearing procedures, and the method of distribution of "salary parity" funds allocated in the 2001-2002 State budget. In addition, if the injunction were to expire on September 23, the District and the College of the Canyons Faculty Association would be able to act in a way that undermines the operation of the EERA, and denies statutory rights of both the part-time faculty employees and the AFT. 

The District noted in its brief to the court that the PERB Administrative Law Judge was expected to issue a decision in the matter shortly. On September 11, 2002, the Administrative Law Judge issued a proposed decision, in which he concluded that the District had not violated the EERA by its actions. The District will undoubtedly argue to the Court that in light of the proposed decision a continuing injunction would not be appropriate.  In addition, the District contends in its opposition brief that with the injunction in place, the District may not implement a salary increase for adjunct employees, to the hardship of the employees. 

For the reasons set out below, neither of these contentions constitutes grounds to allow the injunction to expire.

First, the Administrative Law Judge's proposed decision carries no authority, and is no significance once any party seeks consideration of the PERB itself, by the filing of "exceptions" to the proposed decision.  Under PERB regulations, the authority of the Administrative Law Judge is to issue not a final decision but only a "Proposed Decision." 8 Cal. Code Reg. §32215. PERB regulation 32300 (8 Cal. Code Reg. 32300) provides that any party may ask the Board to reverse or modify a proposed decision by filing with the Board a "statement of exceptions" and supporting brief within 20 days after service of the proposed decision.  The Board itself may then issue its own decision based upon the hearing record, affirm modify or reverse the ALJ's decision, or order the taking of further evidence.  PERB regulation 32320 (8 Cal. Code Reg. §32320).  Thus, if exceptions are filed by any party the proposed decision is of no consequence, and is not binding upon any party.  Only if no exceptions are filed by any party does the "proposed decision" become a "final decision" of the board. 8 Cal. Code Reg. §32305.

AFT will file exceptions to the proposed decision within the permitted 20 days. (See Fassler Declaration).  In this case, then, the proposed decision is of no current effect and the case will remain undecided until the Board itself issues its decision.

Nor are the District's stated concerns about an increase in part-time faculty salaries grounds to allow the injunction to expire.  In fact, the District is free to raise adjunct faculty salaries today or at any other time if it wishes to, and could have done so at any time from March 22 to the present: no aspect of the injunction is a barrier to a decision of that kind.  No provision of the injunction makes any reference to a unilateral decision by the District to increase adjunct faculty wages.  Further, in light of the injunction, the District has no obligation to negotiate with the College of the Canyons Faculty Association about any aspect of the wages or working conditions of the adjunct faculty.  Finally, AFT, which enjoys the support of a majority of the part-time faculty employees of the District (as described below) supports an immediate wage increase for the part-time faculty employees, and distribution of all available "parity" funds to the current part-time faculty employees, and would not oppose the adoption by the District of a unilateral wage increase.  See Fassler Declaration accompanying this letter. 

Finally, no aspect of the State Legislature's allocation of earmarked "parity funds" for part-time faculty members requires collective bargaining with a union prior to implementing an increase in adjunct faculty wages.  As Phillip Hartley's declaration notes, the Legislature intended the parity funds to be distributed after collective bargaining only "where a recognized exclusive representative exists."  In a standard form distributed by the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office (which oversees distribution of the parity funds) to community college districts (Exhibit 1 attached to Fassler declaration), the Chancellor asks each community college district to certify that it will:

1. Determine through the collective bargaining process (or similar process as determined by a district in the absence of a collective bargaining agent) the specific definitions, policies and amounts needed to achieve parity for comparable pay between part-time and full-time faculty for similar work at the district. [Emphasis added]. 

Thus, the Chancellor's office recognizes that in some districts there will be no union with which a District may or must negotiate about the definition of "parity" or how to reach parity or increase faculty salaries.  Further each District must negotiate with a union, if there is one, the definition of "parity" but no District will be precluded from receiving the allocated funds if it is initially impossible for the District to negotiate the initial salary increases. 

If the injunction is allowed to expire on September 23, the District and the College of the Canyons Faculty Association will be free to prevent the part-time faculty employees from exercising their right to choose which union, if any, is to represent them.

AFT has submitted to PERB signed authorization cards from a majority of part-time faculty employees, and has asked PERB to hold an election to allow employees to choose an exclusive bargaining agent. PERB has verified that the AFT request for an election was supported by a majority of part-time faculty employees but has postponed holding an election among the part-time faculty employees until issuance of the proposed decision by the PERB Administrative Law Judge. (Exhibits 2 and 3 to Fassler Declaration).  If the court allows the injunction to expire on September 23, the District and the Faculty Association will be permitted to enter an agreement defining the wages, hours and working conditions of the part-time faculty, thereby preventing the same faculty employees from voting in a PERB-conducted representation election.  Once a contract is in place, the District and the Faculty Association will very likely oppose an election on that ground.  Government Code section 3544.7(b). That series of events would be starkly inconsistent with the legislative intent, in the enactment of the EERA, to provide for democratic selection of unions to negotiate on behalf of school district employees, as set out in the EERA statement of purpose, Government Code section 3540.  We urge the Court to continue the injunction in effect as requested by PERB. 

Respectfully submitted,

Martin Fassler