Board should be required to bargain with the Union on the disputed items. Washington Teachers’ Union, supra, 556 A.2d at 210. Even if, on our own, we would reach a different conclusion from the PERB’s, we must defer to the PERB’s interpretation unless it is clearly erroneous. Id. In other words, if the Union is unable to demonstrate that the PERB’s decision is rationally indefensible, we are obliged to sustain it. The PERB held non-negotiable the Union’s proposal that the work year for attendance counsellors shall not exceed the length of the normal work year for teachers and attendance officers, and that the attendance counsellor’s work day shall be from 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Its conclusions, in our view, were not shown to be unreasonable. See, e.g., Washington Teachers’ Union, supra (<HOLDING>); D.C.Code § 1-613.1(a)(2) (“[t]he basic
holding that a debtorinpossession could reject a collective bargaining agreement holding that opening day and duty days were not mandatory subjects of collective bargaining holding that implementation and termination of safety incentive programs were mandatory subjects of collective negotiations holding that collective bargaining agreements cannot compel the arbitration of statutory rights holding that the terms and conditions placed on applicants are not subjects of mandatory bargaining