San Jose Peace Officer’s Association v. City of San Jose

California’s Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA) contained a provision requiring public employers to meet and confer with official representatives in order to reach an agreement regarding all matters relating to conditions of employment. MMBA explicitly covered wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment. MMBA excluded from bargaining consideration of the merits, necessity, or organization of any service or activity provided by law or executive order. In 1972 the San Jose Police Department (SJPD) implemented a regulation outlining the circumstances under which an SJPD officer could discharge his or her firearm. Representatives of the city of San Jose (the city) (defendant) entered into a memorandum of understanding with the official representative of SJPD employees, the San Jose Peace Officer’s Association (the union) (plaintiff), regarding the policy, which covered a period from 1972 to 1975. In 1975 the city’s chief of police issued a new policy governing the use of firearms without notifying or meeting with the union. Counsel for the union sent a letter to the city requesting a meet-and-confer session, and a subsequent letter expressing his opinion that the city could only change the policy after it fulfilled its obligation to meet and confer on the issue. The union then filed an action in superior court seeking a restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunction to prevent the policy from being implemented. The union also sought a judgment declaring that the use of force was a meet-and-confer item under MMBA. The trial court agreed with the union and issued a permanent injunction enjoining the city from altering the initial use-of-force policy before receiving permission from the union. The court further concluded that the use-of-force policy was a mandatory meet-and-confer subject. The city appealed.