EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES – Lack of Knowledge of Protected Activity

Single Topic for Decision 1762S


View all topics for Decision 1762S

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.12000 – Lack of Knowledge of Protected Activity

The charge did not allege a prima facie case of retaliation since PERB does not enforce whistleblower statutes, the charge did not allege facts showing the State’s improper motive, the dates or nature of her alleged union activity, and the State’s knowledge of her steward training. The Board rejected Wilson-Combs’ argument that it must presume the State’s unlawful motive for purposes of finding a prima facie case of retaliation. The charge did not specify the dates of her alleged union activity or facts showing the State’s knowledge of her activity. Contrary to PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5), the charge did not contain a “clear and concise statement of the fact and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice.”