Labor Relations
AB 2682 (2026): Parties Obtain Court Review of Labor Board Decisions
Updated
Assembly Bill 2682, by Assembly Member Berman, adds Business and Professions Code section 7470.18.5 to create a court-review path for unfair practice cases decided under the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act. The new law lets a party aggrieved by a final decision or order of the Public Employment Relations Board petition a court of appeal for a writ of extraordinary relief, and it sets rules for enforcing final orders. It takes effect January 1, 2027.
Background
The Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act gives transportation network company (TNC) drivers the right to form and join driver organizations, to bargain through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in or refrain from concerted activities. The act designates certain conduct by TNCs and by driver organizations, such as a failure to negotiate in good faith, as unfair practices.
Those unfair practice matters are handled under the Public Employment Relations Board’s unfair practice procedures. Before this bill, the act did not spell out a route for parties to obtain court review of the board’s final decisions in these cases. AB 2682 fills that gap by adding section 7470.18.5 to the Business and Professions Code.
What the Law Changes
Under new Business and Professions Code section 7470.18.5, any charging party, respondent, or intervenor aggrieved by a final decision or order of the board in an unfair practice case may petition for a writ of extraordinary relief. A decision by the board not to issue a complaint is not a “final decision or order” and cannot be challenged this way.
The petition must be filed in the court of appeal for the appellate district where the underlying dispute occurred, within thirty days after the board’s final order or its order denying reconsideration. Once notice is served, the court has jurisdiction, the board files the certified record within ten days, and the court may grant temporary relief and may enforce, modify, or set aside the board’s order.
The board’s findings on questions of fact, including ultimate facts, are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole. The writ provisions in Title 1 of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure apply, except that section 7470.18.5 controls in case of conflict.
A party to a TNC driver unfair practice case may petition a court of appeal within thirty days for review of the board’s final decision, and the statute sets out how the court reviews and how the board enforces final orders.
Enforcement After the Petition Period
If the time to petition for extraordinary relief has expired, the board may seek enforcement of a final decision or order in a court of appeal or a superior court in the district where the case arose. The board must respond within ten days to a party’s inquiry about why it has not sought enforcement.
If the response does not show compliance, the board must seek enforcement at the party’s request, filing the certified record and evidence of noncompliance. After a hearing, if the court finds the order was issued through the board’s procedures and the person or entity refuses to comply, the court enforces the order by writ of mandamus and does not review the merits.
What This Means for You
This law creates a court-review and enforcement process for unfair practice decisions involving rideshare driver labor relations. It affects parties in cases before the Public Employment Relations Board under the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act.
I write these summaries as general information about developments in California employment law. They are not legal advice and don’t create a mediator–client relationship. For guidance on a specific matter, consult a qualified attorney.