Decision 0505E – Santa Paula School District

Timing of action critical to determination of discrimination where activity took place 3 days prior to transfer decision and employer offered no credible justification.

No unlawful conduct in grievance processing where voluntary informal conference not held allegedly because District refused to allow personal representative to attend. District found not to have improperly denied grievance on untimeliness basis.

Circumstancial evidence often all that is available in discrimination cases.

District's discriminatory transfer found to be interference with organizational rights and had potential chilling effect on other employees conduct.

District failed to show it lacked knowledge of protected activity where discriminatee involved in negotiations and had direct contact with district.

District failed to show legitimate business purpose for transfer, where transferee's skills not utilized and replacement immediately hired.

District found to have discriminated by transferring employee who participated in negotiations regarding reduction in work.

Letter of reprimand found not discriminatory or excessive action against classified employee who sent letter directing certificated employees to do particular work.

Employee found to have engaged in protected activity where she immediately contacted union rep after notice of reduction in hours, demanded negotiations, and participated on negotiations team.

Lists elements of Novato test (No. 210) and applies to alleged improper, discriminatory transfer.

Letter of reprimand not found to be unusually harsh treatment where classified employee sent letter to certificated employees directly affecting working relationship.

Isolated discriminatory act insufficient to find unilateral change by contract repudiation.