Illustration of a diverse group of people dressed in blue
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING — PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
Los Angeles Unified School District, et al. v. Los Angeles County Superior Court – California Court of Appeal, Second District (Case No. B311248)
MEMBER(S) INVOLVED: Los Angeles Unified School District
IMPORTANCE OF STATEWIDE ISSUE:
Allowing courts to compel disclosure of confidential, internal communications of governing boards regarding the collective bargaining process would impact a board’s ability to maintain a negotiation position that is favorable to the district and the board’s obligation to protect public funds.
SUMMARY OF THE CASE:

In 2020, plaintiffs in the underlying lawsuit (a group of parents/guardians in the district) sued the Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) seeking to invalidate “side letters” (aka amendments) to the collective bargaining agreement between LAUSD and United Teachers Los Angeles (“UTLA”), arguing that the agreements violate the distance learning requirements in Senate Bill 98 and the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution. During the discovery process the plaintiffs requested disclosure of privileged and confidential labor negotiation records, including internal communications about collective bargaining negotiations. Both LAUSD and UTLA disclosed non-privileged communications but objected to disclosure of confidential internal communications regarding labor negotiations. Plaintiffs filed a motion to compel seeking disclosure of those communications.

On March 23, 2021, the Los Angeles County Superior Court issued an order compelling the district and the labor union to produce requested documents. Both LAUSD and UTLA filed Extraordinary Writs in the appellate court to overturn the district court’s discovery order. The merits of the underlying lawsuit were not at issue in the writs. If allowed to stand, the discovery order would result in the disclosure of otherwise protected internal communications to the other party in the negotiations and would reveal in the district’s case, the strategic thinking of the administration and the governing board to UTLA.

On April 20, 2021, CSBA and the ELA filed an amicus brief in support of LAUSD’s writ on the discovery order (not in the underlying case) to invalidate the lower court’s order to produce privileged internal communications regarding labor negotiations. The ELA brief argued that both the Brown Act and Educational Employment Relations Act require internal communications regarding contract negotiations to remain confidential and exempt from discovery. Allowing the discovery order to stand and compelling disclosure of confidential, internal communications regarding collective bargaining would impact a board’s ability to maintain favorable negotiation positions and the board’s obligation to protect public funds.

Both the Public Employment Relations Board (“PERB”) and the Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”) also filed amicus briefs in support of overturning the district court’s discovery order.

CURRENT STATUS AND/OR OUTCOME:
On May 12, 2021, the appellate court found that the plaintiffs failed to show a valid need for discovery of the privileged internal communications at issue. The ruling has the potential to stand as implicit recognition of a qualified, but not absolute, privilege for the protection of a school district’s internal labor negotiations communications and materials. As directed by the appellate court’s alternative writ, the superior court vacated its discovery order on June 2, 2021.