## Facts

- Several nonteaching employees of the Mount Pleasant Community School District (District) supported the Mount Pleasant Para-Professionals, Aides, Secretaries Organization (Organization) as their employee organization.
- The Organization petitioned the Iowa Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) for a representation election.
- PERB conducted the election, and the Organization lost 10–12.
- About thirty hours before the vote, the District’s superintendent posted a notice in the schools titled “Facts to Be Considered Before You Vote.” It was the District’s only campaign communication before the election.
- The notice included statements warning that if the union won, bargaining would start “with a bare table,” employees “might gain some things” but “might lose some things,” and that unionized employers “when layoffs become necessary, have been forced to take layoff action,” adding that a collective-bargaining agreement could not guarantee against staff reductions.
- The Organization filed election objections under PERB’s election-conduct rules, alleging (1) material misstatements made so late that the Organization could not effectively respond and (2) misconduct that interfered with employees’ free choice.
- A PERB hearing officer rejected the objections, but PERB ultimately concluded the notice violated its rules and invalidated the election.
- The District sought judicial review under the Iowa Administrative Procedure Act (Iowa Code ch. 17A). The district court set aside PERB’s order.
- The Organization appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court, challenging the district court’s interference with PERB’s decision.

## Issues

1. Whether substantial evidence supported PERB’s determination that the superintendent’s late pre-election notice contained material misstatements and/or coercive implications that interfered with employees’ free choice, justifying invalidation of the representation election.

## Decision

- The Iowa Supreme Court reversed the district court.
- The court upheld PERB’s decision invalidating the election and reinstated PERB’s order requiring that the election result not stand.

## Legal Principles

- In judicial review of a contested case under Iowa Code ch. 17A, the court does not reweigh evidence; it asks whether the agency’s findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record.
- PERB has authority to adopt and apply election-conduct rules designed to protect employees’ right to make a free choice in representation elections.
- Under PERB’s rules, an election may be set aside based on (a) misstatements of material fact made at a time and in a manner that prevents an effective reply, or (b) other conduct that prevents employees from freely expressing their preference.
- In a close election, PERB may reasonably infer that late, contested campaign statements could have affected the outcome; on substantial-evidence review, the question is whether PERB’s inference is reasonable, not whether a court would draw the same inference.
- Employer advocacy is not barred, but PERB may treat misleading statements about the legal or practical consequences of unionization, and statements reasonably read as implying adverse job consequences tied to union support, as improper election conduct when supported by the record and the governing rules.

## Conclusion

The Iowa Supreme Court held that PERB’s decision to void the 10–12 representation election was supported by substantial evidence because the superintendent’s last-minute notice could reasonably be viewed as materially misleading and as interfering with employees’ ability to vote freely, so the district court erred in setting aside PERB’s order.


Mount Pleasant Community School District v. PERB, 343 N.W.2d 472 (1984)