112 Cal.App.5th 725
Cal. Ct. App.2025Background:
- OEA (union) conducted a one-day strike (April 29, 2022) in response to Oakland Unified School District’s decision to waive a previously adopted nine‑month planning period and implement school closures.
- OEA filed an unfair practice charge; PERB expedited and found the District violated EERA by failing to bargain over the waiver and closure impacts. The District did not challenge that PERB decision.
- The District filed a competing PERB charge alleging OEA’s strike was unlawful (pre‑impasse/economic). PERB bifurcated the matters, resolved OEA’s complaint first, and dismissed the District’s complaint, holding the strike was a lawful unfair practice strike provoked by the District and that OEA negotiated in good faith.
- The ALJ excluded evidence of educational harm caused by the one‑day strike; PERB affirmed that exclusion. The District sought writ review of PERB’s dismissal.
- The Court of Appeal upheld PERB’s legal determinations (deferring to PERB’s expertise), held that EERA does not clearly prohibit unfair practice strikes (including pre‑impasse ones), found exclusion of educational‑harm evidence was erroneous but harmless, and denied the petition.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (District) | Defendant's Argument (PERB/OEA) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether EERA allows unfair‑practice strikes by public school employees | EERA contains no express grant of strike rights and omits NLRA “concerted activities” language; Congress/Legislature intended to withhold strike rights for public school employees | EERA is silent on strikes; common‑law reserves a qualified right to strike; PERB has authority and precedent to treat some strikes as protected (unfair‑practice) | PERB not clearly erroneous: EERA does not prohibit unfair‑practice strikes; defer to PERB’s construction and precedent allowing qualified strikes |
| Whether unions may strike before PERB adjudicates underlying ULP (pre‑impasse/pre‑adjudication) | EERA’s impasse procedures and PERB’s adjudicative role require exhaustion; pre‑impasse strikes should be barred until PERB decides | NLRA/NLRB precedent permits ULP strikes before adjudication; PERB has discretion and may follow federal approach; injunctive relief is available to curb harm | PERB did not clearly err: pre‑impasse unfair‑practice strikes may be lawful when provoked or when bargaining is made futile; PERB can seek interim injunctions |
| Admissibility of evidence of educational harm from the strike | Evidence of lost instructional time and service disruption is relevant to both liability (provocation/total‑breakdown) and remedy | OEA argued such evidence was irrelevant to liability and should be excluded; PERB found it moot or forfeited | Trial court exclusion was error—educational harm is relevant to liability and remedy—but error was harmless here given one‑day strike and PERB’s findings |
| Constitutional claims (education right, due process, equal protection) | Allowing unfair‑practice strikes violates students’ constitutional right to education and may produce disparate impacts; District asserts due process injury | PERB/OEA: no facial constitutional violation; any harm is fact dependent; political subdivisions lack standing to assert certain federal due process claims; no causal link shown for disparate‑impact claim | Court rejects constitutional challenges: no showing that all unfair‑practice strikes inevitably violate education rights; District lacks standing for the federal due process claim; no proof PERB caused any disparate impact |
Key Cases Cited
- County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v. Los Angeles County Employees’ Assn., 38 Cal.3d 564 (Cal. 1985) (public employees have a qualified common‑law right to strike absent a substantial, imminent threat to public health or safety)
- City of San Jose v. Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, 49 Cal.4th 597 (Cal. 2010) (reaffirmed public employees’ right to strike and PERB’s role in initial jurisdiction over strike legality)
- San Diego Teachers Assn. v. Superior Court, 24 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1979) (EERA parallels other public‑sector labor laws; courts/PERB must weigh public‑interest limits on strikes)
- El Rancho Unified School Dist. v. Nat. Education Assn., 33 Cal.3d 946 (Cal. 1983) (PERB has initial, exclusive jurisdiction to determine legality of strikes; unfair‑practice strikes may be arguably protected)
- Modesto City Schools Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 136 Cal.App.3d 881 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982) (recognition of PERB’s jurisdiction on strike legality issues)
- Redwoods Community College Dist. v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 159 Cal.App.3d 617 (Cal. Ct. App. 1984) (EERA closely tracks MMBA; statutory context informed interpretation)
- Butt v. State of California, 4 Cal.4th 668 (Cal. 1992) (California constitutional right to education requires basic equality; not all disparities or truncated school time constitute a constitutional violation)