Public Sector Case Notes

• Jurisdiction: California,United States
• Author: By Kerianne Steele and Alejandro Delgado
• Publication year: 2020
• Citation: Vol. 34 No. 2

Public Sector Case Notes

By Kerianne Steele and Alejandro Delgado

Kerianne Steele is a shareholder of Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld. She provides general representation to labor unions, primarily in the public sector. Alejandro Delgado is an Associate in the Los Angeles office of Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld. He represents and advises public sector unions in all aspects of labor and employment law.

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD

JOINT EMPLOYER STATUSCounty Is a Joint Employer Where Medical Clinics Are Owned by Private Corporations but County Retains the Right to Control Work

County of Ventura v. Public Employment Relations Board, 42 Cal. App. 5th 443 (2019)

The Second District Court of Appeal held that the County of Ventura (County) is a joint employer of clinic employees of satellite medical clinics owned by private corporations but under contract with the County to provide medical services.

Service Employees International Union, Local 721 (Union) sought to represent non-physician employees of satellite medical clinics owned by private corporations but under contract with Ventura County Medical Center to provide medical services. The County refused to process the Union's petition to represent clinic employees on the ground that private corporations and not the County were the sole employers. The Union filed an unfair practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), alleging the County's refusal to process its petition violated the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA). An administrative law judge (ALJ) found in favor of the County and dismissed the unfair practice charge. The Board reversed the ALJ's decision and found the County is a single employer, or, in the alternative, a joint employer of clinic employees. The County filed a petition for writ of extraordinary relief from PERB's decision. The County argued that, because clinic employees were private employees and not County employees, the County is not an employer within the meaning of the MMBA, and PERB lacked jurisdiction.

The court of appeal affirmed PERB's decision. The court held that substantial evidence supported PERB's finding that the County was a joint employer of clinic employees because the County retained the right to control the "manner and method in which clinic employees' work is performed," citing Service Employees International Union v. County of Los Angeles, 225 Cal. App. 3d 761, 769 (1990). The court reasoned that, although the clinics' medical directors directly hire clinic employees and set their salaries, the County exercised control over compensation and staffing decisions because the County retained ultimate control over the clinics' financial resources that pay for compensation and staffing. According to the court, the clinics' "shared call" system, which required the clinics to share staff as needed with other County clinics and hospitals to ensure minimal staffing levels are maintained, further showed the County exercised its right to control staffing decisions. The court further found that the County had a right to control the clinics' operations, patient care and personnel policies, training, and other conditions of employment at the clinics. The court...