Opposition to Request for Injunctive Relief

Request for Injunctive Relief

On March 12, 2008 CCPOA filed this "Request for Injunctive Relief" with the DPA, a demand to return to the bargaining table.

MOU Letter “Response to Request to Commence Post-Implementation Bargaining”

Dear Mr. Alexander and Mrs. Branine:

We have just reviewed your letters of December 12, 2007 and January 16, 2008 and must decline your request to commence post- implementation bargaining. We respectfully disagree that any of the events described in your letters constitutes  a   "change of circumstances" that revives bargaining.

MOU Letter “Request for Clarification Regarding Bargain in Good Faith”

Early this year, CCPOA and DPA met at PERB to attend a mandatory settlement conference. Although the case didn't settle, the parties did discuss the December 27, 2007, letter. During that discussion, DPA asked for clarification which was provided by CCPOA legal counsel in a letter to them (DPA) dated January 16, 2008. That letter is important in that it reiterated our position and followed up on the question we specifically asked during that meeting at PERB. The final paragraph of the letter from January 16 states:

If the State is not prepared to return to the bargaining table based on the terms outlined above, please advise me under what terms, if any, the State is prepared to return to the bargaining table.

MOU Letter “Demand to Bargain in Good Faith”

Dear Mr. Gilb:

On December 7, 2007. the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) issued an unfair practice complaint against the State alleging that the State cannot lawfully implement all three years of its last best and final offer (LBFO) which was imposed on Bargaining Unit 6......

Chuck Alexander Memo 12-14-07

Yesterday, December 13th, 2007, we sent you a copy of the Department of Personnel Administration's (DPA) initial response letter to the public Employment Board (PERB). In this letter... 

DPA Letter to EEs - Dated 12.14.07

SUBJECT: Status of Implemented Terms

In correspondence to you dated September 18, 2007, we informed you of our intention to implement certain terms and conditions of employment following the rejection of our final offer by CCPOA. In that correspondence we, informed you of our intention to implement all three years of the economics contained in that offer. 

CCPOA Memo re: DPA Letter - Dated 12.14.07

State Board, 

Yesterday, December 13,2007, we sent you a copy of the Department of Personnel Administration's (DPA) initial response letter to the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). In this letter, DPA has withdrawn the second and third year "economic proposals" of its (State's) implemented package. The significance ofthis is quite obvious in that, as we predicted long ago, this Administration never intended to honor any multiyear year package including any pay increase to Unit 6. Also, with the current budget problems created by this Administration, it remains to be seen whether the pay promised to Unit 6 for this year will happen.

In reading the letter further, you will note that the State "agrees" with CCPOA's complaint regarding the "omission" of the vice presidents' leave (VPL) in the last best and final. As a result, this section ofthe LBF  will presumably be honored by the State. That remains to be seen.  

Request for dismissal

The California Correctional Officer's Association (CCPOA), in its Second Amended Unfair Practice Charge, alleged that the State engaged in a number of unfair practices. On December 7th, 2007, the Office of the General Counsel of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) agreed with CCPOA on two matters and...

DPA Letter - Dated 12.13.07

Re: California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. State of California, et al.

UPC No. SA-CE-1621-S

Request for Dismissal

Dear Mr. Smith:

The California Correctional Peace Officers' Association (CCPOA), in its Second Amended Unfair Practice Charge, alleged that the State engaged in a number of unfair practices. On December 7,2007, the Office of the General Counsel of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) agreed with CCPOA on two matters and issued a complaint against the State of California (State). (See, separate PERB letters, dated December 7,2007, Notice of  Complaint and Partial Dismissal.)  

DPA Letter - Dated 12.13.07

Re: California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. State of California, et al.

UPC No. SA-CE-1621-S

Request for Dismissal

Dear Mr. Smith:

The California Correctional Peace Officers' Association (CCPOA), in its Second Amended Unfair Practice Charge, alleged that the State engaged in a number of unfair practices. On December 7,2007, the Office of the General Counsel of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) agreed with CCPOA on two matters and issued a complaint against the State of California (State). (See, separate PERB letters, dated December 7,2007, Notice of  Complaint and Partial Dismissal.)  

CCPOA vs. PERB - Official Complaint

It having been charged by Charging Party that Respondent engaged in unfair practices in violation of California Government Code section 3519, the General Counsel of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), pursuant to California Government Code sections 3513(h), 3514.5 and 3541.3(i) and California Code of Regulations, title 8, section 32640, issues this COMPLAINT on behalf of PERB and alleges:  

PERB Partial Dismissal - Dated 12.07.07

Re: California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. State of California (Department of Personnel Administration)

Unfair Practice Charge No. SA-CE-1621-S (Second Amended Charge)

PARTIAL DISMISSAL

Dear Mr. Adam:

The above-referenced unfair practice charge was filed on September 25,2007, and amended on October 2,2007. The California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) alleges that the State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (State or DPA) violated  the Ralph C. Dills Act (Dills Act)...

PERB Complaint - Dated 12.07.07

Re: California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. State of California (Department of Personnel Administration)

Unfair Practice Charge No. SA-CE-1621-S

Dear Parties:

The Office of the General Counsel has issued the enclosed COMPLAINT in the above-entitled matter. The Respondent is required to file an ANSWER within 20 calendar days from the date of service of the COMPLAINT, pursuant to PERB Regulation 32644.  The required contents of the ANSWER are described in Regulation 32644(b). If you have not filed a Notice of  Appearance form, one should be completed and returned with your ANSWER.  

Press Message 10-12-2007

Re: California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) Injunctive Relief Request No. 530 

Unfair Practice Charge No. SA-CE-1621-S

Dear Parties:

By direction of the Board, the request for injunctive relief in the above-entitled matter is denied without prejudice; sufficient grounds therefore not having been demonstrated.  

Package Offer - Dated 09.12.07

The State of California (State) hereby makes the following last, best and final offer to CCPOA to settle and conclude negotiations over a successor Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).

The State proposes a 3-year package offer which provides fiscal certainty for the State and guarantees specific and transparent pay increases to the members of Unit 6, the State's employees.

This offer is a formal offer and supersedes all others. This is a package offer which must be accepted or  rejected in its entirety.  

Letter from DPA - Dated 09.12.07

Dear Messrs. Adam, Jimenez, Weiss and Alexander:

On August 22, 2007, the State of California (State) provided a package offer to you. We received the California Peace Officer Associations (CCPOA's) rejection of this offer on September 5, 2007. Although we appreciate CCPOA's agreement to rollover language, CCPOA failed to address all of the sections identified on the summary sheet, and added other sections that were not a part of the respective sheet...