Dan Mariscal v. Los Angeles City Employee Relations Board (Service Employees International Union Local 721) Filed as No B218133 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. BS116416)
Court of Appeal, Second District

Court Upholds Union Merger, Recognizing it as Employees Bargaining Representative

The issue stemmed from a complaint filed by Dan Mariscal questioning the legality of an old local union merger into a new local. Mariscal claimed that the merger was invalid since it would require a separate vote of the old local’s membership before it could merge into a new one.

Court records show that Dan Mariscal, a city employee, was a member of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 347, representing about 9,000 city employees. SEIU is an international union, affiliated with AFL-CIO and comprised of chartered local unions which represent workers in labor matters. Local 347 was chartered by SEIU in 1962 and replaced by Local 721 in January 2007.

Local 721 was formed as a “megalocal” of SEIU by merging 347 with five other southern California government employee locals after the union’s international executive board and SEIU members statewide endorsed it with 31, 408 votes in favor and 4,256 votes against it.

The new local then asked for recognition from the city’s Employee Relations Board (ERB) as Local 347’s successor and bargaining representative.

Mariscal opposed the petition based on two main grounds:

• That the 347 members were not given a separate vote on the measure (merger)
• That the merger would deprive members of their right to representation

After hearing, the ERB granted the new local’s petition, adopting the board findings that the merger neither violated the due process rights of opponents nor the right of members to be represented.

In response, Mariscal petitioned the court for a writ of mandate.

The Los Angeles Superior Court denied Mariscal’s petition for writ of mandate directing the board to set aside the approval.

Mariscal appealed.

During appeal, the Second District Court of Appeal found that the merger did not violate any provision of the SEIU constitution and bylaws that would require a separate vote of locals which are targeted for merger. The court also declared that this was a process authorized in the parent union’s governing laws.

Further, the court said that under the city’s Employee Relations Ordinance, a union representing city employees may “merge or affiliate with other unions”. In addition to this, the vote of affected members or employees is not required in order to recognize the new union because it is simply “a continuation of the old union under a new name” and not a “substantially different organization”.

The court therefore affirmed the ERB conclusion that Local 721, whose members include those of the old 347 board, is not a substantially different organization.

The Second District Court of Appeal therefore affirmed the judgment, recognizing the new union as the bargaining representation of the workers.