In Anderson v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Com. (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 817, David Anderson, a member of the Professional Peace Officers Association (PPOA), became an organizer for a rival union, the Lieutenant and Sergeants Organization (LASO), which was formed to replace the PPOA as the bargaining representative. In accordance with its bylaws, the PPOA board of directors terminated Anderson's membership for engaging in " 'acts inimical to the welfare of the PPOA.' " (Id. at p. 821.) Anderson did not contest his expulsion but continued his efforts to replace the PPOA with the LASO. Eventually, a decertification election was held, the PPOA prevailed, and the LASO voted to dissolve. Soon thereafter, Anderson applied to be reinstated as a member of the PPOA. The board voted unanimously to deny his application. Anderson filed an unfair practice charge with the Commission, alleging the PPOA had interfered with his right under the Ordinance to participate in the activities of the employee organization of his choice. (See L.A. County Code, 5.04.070, 5.04.240, subd. B.1.) An administrative hearing officer found in favor of the PPOA. The Commission adopted the hearing officer's recommendation and dismissed the unfair practice charge. Anderson filed a petition for a writ of administrative mandate seeking to set aside the Commission's decision and to be reinstated as a member of the PPOA with full membership rights. The trial court denied the petition, and Anderson appealed. We affirmed, stating: "Although the MMBA was designed to protect public employees in the exercise of their rights under the act, the MMBA also provides that 'employee organizations may establish reasonable restrictions regarding who may join and may make reasonable provisions for the dismissal of individuals from membership ... .' (Gov. Code, 3503.) ... ... Anderson's expulsion was clearly justified by his efforts to organize a rival union and to decertify PPOA, which are certainly acts inimical to the welfare of PPOA in violation of ... PPOA's bylaws." (Anderson, supra, 229 Cal.App.3d at pp. 825-826.) " 'An organization has the natural right of self preservation, and may with propriety expel members who show their disloyalty by joining a rival organization. ...' ... "There is no question concerning the propriety of the procedures followed by PPOA in this case. When a disloyal member is expelled for his considerable efforts to form a rival union and later becomes its president and urges his fellow workers to vote to decertify the union in favor of his rival union, and then applies for readmission only four months after the unsuccessful decertification election and only days after disbanding the rival union, the denial of his reinstatement application by a unanimous vote of the board of directors is entirely reasonable. ... In the ' "treason" cases in which an individual's acts are patently antagonistic to the continued existence of the union as a collective bargaining agent, ... the courts lose no time in such cases upholding union discipline.' " (Anderson, supra, 229 Cal.App.3d at p. 826.