Hartnell Community College District v. Superior Court

Good Law
124 Cal. App. 4th 1443·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 2149·2004 Daily Journal DAR 14907·22 Cal. Rptr. 3d 410·176 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2556
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 15, 2004H025540California2,793 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rushing, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

In this original proceeding, Hartnell Community College District and its president (collectively, District) petition for a writ of mandate directing respondent court to vacate its order granting the petition of real party in interest Hartnell College Faculty Association (Faculty Association) to compel arbitration of two faculty grievances. District contends that it cannot be compelled to arbitrate because the arbitration agreement in the parties’ collective bargaining agreement gives it the unilateral power to determine whether a faculty grievance should be resolved through a means of redress other than arbitration. Therefore, where, as here, District has determined that the faculty members’ grievances may be redressed through the collective bargaining process rather than arbitration, District believes it cannot be compelled to arbitrate.

We granted writ review to determine an issue of significance in higher education labor relations. Having performed de novo review of the ambiguous arbitration agreement in question and the extrinsic evidence relevant to its interpretation, for the reasons discussed below we conclude that the arbitration agreement does…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.