Decision 0853H – California State University (Jenkins)
LA-CE-265-H
Decision Date: December 5, 1990
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Perc Vol: 15
Perc Index: 22000
Decision Headnotes
1503.02000 – Regulations Considered (By Number)
PERB Regulation 32615 provides that a charge alleging an unfair practice must contain "(5) a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice." Charging party failed to satisfy this requirement as he did not identify when the objected-to work rules were instituted, what specific rules were enforced, what union activity(s) the rules were instituted in response to, and when the statements by a supervisor were allegedly made; p. 8-9. PERB Regulation 32635 - Charging party failed to allege sufficient facts to satisfy the "good cause" standard required under PERB Regulation 32635(b) for presenting, on appeal, new supporting evidence that was not alleged in the original or amended charges; p. 9.
1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case
PERB Regulation 32615 provides that a charge alleging an unfair practice must contain "(5) a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice." Charging party failed to satisfy this requirement as he did not identify when the [objected to] work rules were instituted, what specific rules were enforced, what union activity(s) the rules were instituted in response to, and when the statements by a supervisor were allegedly made; pp. 8-9.
1100.04000 – Amendments
New allegations may not be dismissed merely because they are "not found within the original charge." New factual allegations [raised in the amendment] which are unrelated to the original charge may be used to support an entirely new charge, provided the new allegations describe conduct which occurred within six months of the date of the new charge; p. 5.
1100.05000 – Dismissal of Charge; Appeal
Charging party failed to allege sufficient facts to satisfy the "good cause" standard required under PERB Regulation 32635(b) for presenting, on appeal, new supporting evidence that was not alleged in the original or amended charges; p. 9.
1100.08000 – Pleading Requirements
Dismissal is upheld for failure to allege facts to support a prima facie case of discrimination/retaliation. Third amended charge, which appears to state several new allegations of discriminatory conduct by the employer, is properly dismissed by regional attorney because of charging party's failure to provide dates indicating whether the newly alleged conduct occurred within six months of the date of the third amended charge. Also, the new allegations were insufficient to establish a prima facie case because they were not alleged within six months of the original charge and the charging party failed to describe how the allegations were related to the original charge, if at all; p. 7.
1101.02000 – Amended Charge or Complaint; Withdrawal of Charge; Relation Back Doctrine
New allegations [raised in an amended charge] cannot be used to support the original charge, under the relation back doctrine, where the allegations are not alleged within six months of the original charge and no indication is provided as to how the new allegations are related to the original charge, if at all; p. 8.
1102.01000 – Pre-Arbitration
A factual allegation timely raised in an amended charge in support of a claim of discrimination/retaliation is deferable to arbitration under the binding arbitration provision of the collective bargaining agreement where the contract has a provision that prohibits the employer from taking reprisals against an employee for participation in union activities; p. 6.