Case Study:
The City Council of Vernon, California, enacted a resolution that unilaterally prohibited city employees from maintaining personal property with city property. The resolution was specifically targeted against firefighters who, while off duty, would wash their personal cars at city facilities. This carwashing practice had been taking place for several years and was fairly widespread throughout the department. The Vernon Fire Fighters Union charged the city with unilateral action that violated the California “meet and confer” act. This act required municipal officials to meet and confer with union officials before acting on any subject within the union’s scope of representation or terms and conditions of employment. The city denied the existence of any obligation to bargain with the union over this subject. The city maintained that the decision to ban car washing was a managerial policy decision that did not have to be discussed with the union. Must the city bargain with the union over its decision to ban car washing? Decide. [Vernon Fire Fighters Local 2312 v. City of Vernon, 1979–81 PBC (CCH) ¶ 37,066 (Cal. Ct. App.)]
Your answer must be, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font (size 12), one-inch margins on all sides, APA format and also include references.