All notes for Subtopic 1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2846M | City and County of San Francisco 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case that a respondent employer made an unlawful unilateral change, a charging party union that exclusively represents a bargaining unit must prove: (1) the employer changed or deviated from the status quo; (2) the change or deviation concerned a matter within the scope of representation; (3) the change or deviation had a generalized effect or continuing impact on represented employees’ terms or conditions of employment; and (4) the employer reached its decision without first providing adequate advance notice of the proposed change to the union and bargaining in good faith over the decision, at the union’s request, until the parties reached an agreement or a lawful impasse. (pp. 9-10.) more or view all topics or full text. | 47 | 88 | 11/17/22 |
| 2579M | County of Monterey 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case When a charge alleges the existence of a past practice, the charging party must specifically identify and describe the practice allegedly altered by a unilateral change. However, when, as here, the charging party alleges the employer has established a new policy where none previously existed, “[t]here is no way to more specifically allege the non-existence of something than to state it did not exist.” more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 33 | 07/20/18 |
| 2579M | County of Monterey 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case When a charge alleges the existence of a past practice, the charging party must specifically identify and describe the practice allegedly altered by a unilateral change. However, when, as here, the charging party alleges the employer has established a new policy where none previously existed, “[t]here is no way to more specifically allege the non-existence of something than to state it did not exist.” more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 33 | 07/20/18 |
| 2622E | Cabrillo Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case At the charge investigation stage, the charging party’s burden is not to produce evidence, but merely to allege facts that, if proven true in a subsequent hearing, would state a prima facie violation. (p. 4.) more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 126 | 02/04/19 |
| 2575M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging Parties alleged that their exclusive representative had breached its duty of fair representation by: (1) inducing Charging Parties to continue working misclassified overtime hours with false assurances that they would be fully compensated for all overtime hours worked if the organization prevailed in its grievance against the employer; (2) urging an arbitrator to award all employees an equal lump sum payment to remedy the grievance and capping the employer’s total liability, rather than awarding full back pay only to those employees who actually worked the misclassified hours; and, (3) failing to provide notice and opportunity for input and/or misleading Charging Parties regarding the status of settlement negotiations and the terms of an arbitrator’s opinion and award, despite requests by Charging Parties for such information. The Office of the General Counsel dismissed the charge for lack of jurisdiction over the arbitrator, lack of ripeness for review, and/or failure to state a prima facie case of an unfair practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 22 | 06/28/18 |
| 2575M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The Board denied an appeal and adopted the dismissal of an unfair practice charging alleging a breach of the duty of fair representation arising from damages allegedly suffered as the result of an arbitrator’s opinion and award in a grievance brought by the exclusive representative on Charging Parties’ behalf. An arbitrator is not a proper respondent in an unfair practice and therefore PERB had no authority to review the arbitrator’s opinion and award to determine if its provisions constituted an unfair labor practice. Additionally, the facts, as alleged in the charge, demonstrated that Charging Parties had notice and opportunity to give their input before their representative entered into a tentative agreement to settle the dispute and that, because the tentative settlement agreement was never finalized, any harm suffered by Charging Parties was not attributable to the representative’s acts or omissions. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 22 | 06/28/18 |
| 2614E | Los Rios Community College District and Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, Local 2279 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The procedure for claiming error in the dismissal of an unfair practice charge is to appeal the dismissal to the Board itself, not to file a new unfair practice charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 43 | 105 | 12/21/18 |
| 2548E | Lake Elsinore Unified School District (Edwards) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where Charging Party’s discrimination allegation turns on a matter of law outside PERB’s traditional expertise, i.e., whether the public school employer complied with state law and/or regulations governing certificated employee retirement credit, the appropriate question is not which of two competing interpretations of external law is the more plausible, but whether the language in dispute is reasonably susceptible to the charging party’s interpretation and whether that interpretation supports a viable, i.e., non-frivolous, legal theory of an unfair practice or other violation of a PERB-administered statute. Where the investigation of an unfair practice charge results in receipt of conflicting allegations of fact or contrary theories of law, fair proceedings, if not due process, demand that a complaint be issued and the matter be sent to formal hearing to test a novel theory or competing theories of law, so long as the theory advanced is “viable,” i.e. non-frivolous. The Board is necessarily cautious about rejecting allegations involving statutory, decisional, regulatory, or other authority outside PERB’s jurisdiction and special expertise in labor relations, particularly when the area of external law is itself unsettled. more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 102 | 02/02/18 |
| 2548E | Lake Elsinore Unified School District (Edwards) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Although the charge relied extensively on the Education Code and other matters outside PERB’s jurisdiction, because it alleged that a public school district employer had denied charging party retirement or other employment benefits to which she was legally entitled because of her protected activity, the matter constitutes an unfair practice allegation within PERB’s legislatively designated field of expertise. (p. 12.) The Office of the General Counsel correctly determined that while PERB has no authority to enforce or order remedies for violations of the Education Code, the Board and its agents may interpret the provisions of the Education Code or other matters of external law where necessary to administer EERA or to harmonize it with external law. (pp. 11-12.) To avoid acting in excess of its authority, PERB has an obligation to determine whether it has jurisdiction over a dispute, regardless of whether the parties themselves have raised the issue. (p. 11.) more or view all topics or full text. | 42 | 102 | 02/02/18 |
| 2522H | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where case file gave no indication that the domination and interference theory of liability alleged in the charge had been investigated or addressed in a warning letter, Board vacated the dismissal of that allegation and remanded to Office of the General Counsel for further investigation. PERB Regulations prohibit dismissal of any allegation without prior notice to the charging party. (PERB Reg. 32620, subd. (d).) (pp. 18-19.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 150 | 03/20/17 |
| 2522H | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Although PERB Regulations place no limit on the number of times a charging party may amend its charge before a warning letter issues or before the charge is dismissed, they do not require an investigating Board agent to provide a separate warning letter for each successive amendment to a charge. If, following a warning letter that adequately identifies the deficiencies in a charge, subsequent amendments do not correct those deficiencies, dismissal is appropriate. (PERB Reg. 32620, subd. (d); 32621.) (p. 4.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 150 | 03/20/17 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case As a general rule, a complaint alleging surface bargaining need identify only those factual allegations that, in the opinion of the Office of the General Counsel, are sufficient to state a prima facie case, while other facts, which are probative of the respondent’s conduct or state of mind during negotiations and which were alleged in the charge, may be established through competent evidence at hearing and appropriately considered, without amending the complaint. (p. 15.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 97 | 11/30/16 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where conduct allegedly constitutes both evidence of the respondent’s bad faith and a separate unfair practice, the essential facts for each theory of liability should be stated in the complaint and identified as separate unfair practices. A respondent is entitled to notice of the issues in dispute, so that it can preserve documents and secure witnesses, or expect repose as to those unfair practice allegations that are dismissed, withdrawn, abandoned or otherwise disposed of during the Office of the General Counsel’s investigation. (PERB Regs. 32620, subd. (c), 32630, 32640, subds. (a), (b).) Identifying the essential factual allegations and the theories of liability in a complaint is necessary to provide adequate notice and ensure a full and fair adjudication of the issues, including an opportunity for the respondent to raise any affirmative defenses specific to each theory of liability. (pp. 15-16.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 97 | 11/30/16 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Although a charge must include a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice (PERB Reg. 32615, subd. (a)(5)), a complaint alleging surface bargaining need not list every possible indicator of bad faith that may be presented at the hearing. Under PERB’s fact pleading standard, the charging party must include the essential facts (often described as the “who, what, when, where and how” of the charge) with sufficient specificity to permit the Board agent to determine whether “the facts as alleged in the charge state a legal cause of action and [whether] the charging party is capable of providing admissible evidence in support of the allegations.” However, PERB does not require the charging party to identify or provide all of its evidence in the charge. (pp. 12-13.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 97 | 11/30/16 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A surface bargaining complaint complies with PERB Regulations and decisional law when it alleges that, by the totality of its conduct, “including but not limited to,” the specific conduct described in the complaint, the respondent has failed and refused to meet and confer in good faith. Notwithstanding the phrase “including but not limited to” or similar language, the complaint identifies the specific acts or indicia that are sufficient to state a prima facie case, while also giving the respondent notice that, under PERB’s totality of conduct test, the specific acts or indicia described in the complaint are not necessarily exhaustive of the evidence the charging party may present at hearing to prove the surface bargaining allegation. (p. 12.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 97 | 11/30/16 |
| 2452E | Hartnell Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The charging party is entitled to a warning letter identifying any deficiencies before the charge is dismissed. (PERB Reg. 32620, subd. (d).) Because charging party’s allegation that he was denied payment for hours actually worked in retaliation for his protected activity, the dismissal was reversed and the charge remanded for issuance of a complaint. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 56 | 09/04/15 |
| 2431M | County of Santa Clara 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case While PERB Regulation 32620 requires a Board agent investigating a charge to assist the charging in stating information that is required, no similar requirement is extended to affirmative defenses not raised by a respondent. more or view all topics or full text. | 39 | 181 | 06/10/15 |
| 2453E | Cabrillo Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case When the respondent can establish an affirmative defense as a matter of law based on undisputed facts, the charge must be dismissed even when the charging party has otherwise established a prima facie case. In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been alleged. However, the Board’s regulations do not empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge. Where the investigation results in receipt of conflicting allegations of fact or contrary theories of law, fair proceedings, if not due process, demand that a complaint be issued and the matter be sent to formal hearing. The Board has construed this precept to mean that a complaint should issue to test viable competing theories of law. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 57 | 09/17/15 |
| I057M | City of Fremont 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB’s function under MMBA is to exercise its exclusive initial jurisdiction to interpret and administer the statute, including the determination of whether an unfair practice charge is justified and, if so, what remedies are most appropriate to effectuate the proposes of the MMBA. PERB determines in the first instance whether a party’s conduct constitutes a failure to bargain in good faith. PERB’s role as the expert agency charged with administering the MMBA is to initiate and conduct administrative proceedings to determine whether an unfair practice has occurred and what remedy, if any, is appropriate. In so doing, PERB must conduct hearings in order to develop a sufficient factual record to: (1) allow the Board to resolve in a final decision any dispute as to an alleged violation of the MMBA; and (2) allow for meaningful judicial review of a final Board decision. more or view all topics or full text. | 38 | 68 | 10/25/13 |
| 2283E | Jurupa Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case An employee organization’s duty of fair representation runs to the employee, and is enforced by a charge against the employee organization, not against the employer. A prima face case of retaliation is established by allegations that the employee engaged in protected activity, the employer knew thereof, the employer took action against or adverse to the interest of the employee, and the employer acted “because of” the employee’s protected activity. The motive (“because of”) element is established by direct proof or inferred from the record as a whole. An inference of unlawful motive, i.e., the “nexus” between the protected conduct and the employer’s challenged action, may be found in facts which suggest an unlawful motive, including suspicious timing, disparate treatment, departure from established policies and procedures, and employer justifications which are exaggerated, inadequate, inconsistent or contradictory. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 58 | 08/21/12 |
| 2400H | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Failure of Board agent to inform charging party that respondent was entitled to file response to amended charge does not affect outcome of dismissal of charge. Extension of time granted to respond to amended charge did not violate PERB Regulation 32132(b), where there was no basis to conclude that Board agent did not find good cause for extension. Amended charge that attempted to cure the fatal subject matter jurisdictional defect by re-characterizing what is essentially a wage claim into a claim that the wage dispute arose in retaliation for EERA-protected activities does not state prima facie violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 39 | 71 | 11/24/14 |
| 2384H | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Before dismissing any allegations in a charge, the investigating Board agent must advise the charging party in writing of any deficiencies in the charge in a warning letter, unless otherwise agreed by the Board agent and the charging party. (PERB Reg. 32620, subd. (d).) more or view all topics or full text. | 39 | 16 | 06/30/14 |
| 2222M | City and County of San Francisco 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case To demonstrate that an employer discriminated or retaliated against an employee in violation of MMBA section 3506 and PERB Regulation 32603(a), the charging party must show that: (1) the employee exercised rights under MMBA; (2) the employer had knowledge of the exercise of those rights; (3) the employer took adverse action against the employee; and (4) the employer took the action because of the exercise of those rights. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 89 | 11/23/11 |
| 2249M | National Union of Healthcare Workers 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The name of a person alleged to be an agent of an employee organization or an employer is not an indispensable element of a prima facie case of interference with employee rights. While allegations that a union destroyed and removed unit members’ personal property are insufficient by themselves to establish prima facie conduct which, if true, interfered with employee’s right to freely choose a representative or constituted a serious irregularity in the conduct of the election, each allegation must be viewed not separately, but as part of the overall assessment of the union’s conduct in a totality of conduct test. The United Teachers-Los Angeles (Ragsdale) (1992) PERB Decision No. 944) formulation that a “Charging Party must allege with specificity who, what, when, where and how” of the respondent’s alleged violation may be useful in explaining to a charging party how to plead a violation, but is it is not a hurdle over which every charging party must leap at the risk of dismissal. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 155 | 04/18/12 |
| 2294M | County of Orange 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case To the extent charging party is alleging that it filed its request for unit modification after the expiration of a memorandum of understanding and before the execution of a successor agreement, it may not do so for the first time on appeal without good cause. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 123 | 11/30/12 |
| 2305S | State of California (Department of Mental Health, Department of Developmental Services) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge that consists entirely of document describing documents by charging party to the California State Auditor’s Office and the Governor’s Office does not contain a clear and concise statement of conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice within PERB’b jurisdiction as required by PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5). more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 154 | 12/31/12 |
| 2301C | Los Angeles Superior Court 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party failed to establish sufficient grounds for overturning Board agent’s dismissal of charge for failure to comply with requirements of PERB Regulation 32615(c) requiring service of unfair practice charge on respondent and filing of proof of service with PERB. Charging party provided no explanation for her failure to respond to Board agent’s repeated inquiries prior to dismissal of charge, and failed to provide clear evidence of a valid proof of service. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 148 | 12/21/12 |
| 2204M | Service Employees International Union, Local 1021 (Horan) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where substance of allegation was that union “failed to represent me at an arbitration hearing,” charging party failed to state sufficient facts, which if proven, would constitute a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation, thereby warranting dismissal of the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 50 | 09/23/11 |
| 2288M | City of Pinole 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In processing an unfair practice charge, the role of a Board agent is to investigate the charge to determine if an unfair practice has been committed, but the Board’s regulations do not “empower agents to rule on the ultimate merits of a charge.” (Eastside Union School District (1984) PERB Decision No. 466 (Eastside); PERB Regs. 32620 and 32640.) Pursuant to Eastside, a complaint may be issued to test viable competing theories of law. Although the Board’s role ordinarily is to resolve disputed questions of law, under the unique setting of this case, where there is no guiding PERB precedent and the legal issues involved are technical and complex pension laws outside PERB’s normal jurisdiction, it is appropriate to remand matter for issuance of complaint so that the issues may be decided upon a full evidentiary record. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 90 | 10/15/12 |
| 2147E | Fontana Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) requires, among other things, that an unfair practice charge include a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice. This burden includes alleging the who, what, when, where and how of an unfair practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 10 | 12/10/10 |
| 2155M | County of Orange * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Santa Clara Valley Water District (2013) Decision No. 2349- M 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Santa Clara Valley Water District (2013) PERB Decision No. 2349-M, where the Board held that an employee’s status as a union official is enough by itself to constitute protected activity. * * *PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) requires, among other things, that an unfair practice charge include a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice. This burden includes alleging the who, what, when, where and how of an unfair practice. Thus, a charging party’s bare assertion that he was a union president without specific references to lawful actions he took in office is insufficient to establish he engaged in protected activity. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 24 | 01/18/11 |
| 2133E | United Faculty of Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District (Tarvin) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) requires, among other things, that an unfair practice charge include a clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice. This burden requires a charging party to allege the who, what, when, where and how of an unfair practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 140 | 09/21/10 |
| 2186M | Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Chow) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In computing the time period for filing an appeal from dismissal, a five-day extension of time applies to any filing made in response to documents served by mail. When the last day to perform an act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the time period for filing is extended to the next business day. Where last day to file appeal following service of dismissal by mail fell on a State holiday, appeal filed the next business day was timely. Pursuant to PERB Regulation 32635(b), no good cause found to consider new allegations and evidence on appeal, where all of the dates of the events alleged for the first time on appeal predate the dismissal of the charge and the appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 7 | 06/15/11 |
| 2187E | California School Employees Association and its Chapter 746 (Perez) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB has historically treated the filing of an amended charge after an unfair practice charge has been dismissed as an appeal from the dismissal of the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 36 | 8 | 06/15/11 |
| 2176M | County of Riverside * * * OVERRULED IN PART by County of San Diego (2020) PERB Decision No. 2721-M 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case ***OVERRULED IN PART by County of San Diego (2020) PERB Decision No. 2721-M, where the Board held that the continuing violation doctrine and new wrongful act doctrine are separate statute of limitations exceptions and must be analyzed separately.***Charge untimely because employee organization learned more than six months before the charge was filed that the employer had refused to register it under the employer’s local rules. The continuing violation doctrine did not apply because the employer’s refusals to register the employee organization within the limitations period were merely reiterations of the same position. The statute of limitations was not equitably tolled while the employee organization pursued an action against the employer in superior court because that forum was not one agreed upon by the parties for resolution of disputes between them. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 69 | 03/29/11 |
| 2168M | Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West Local 2005 (Hayes) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case While the Board agent’s duties include assisting the charging party in stating the proper form of the charge, making inquiries and reviewing the charge and any accompanying materials, the duty remains with the charging party to provide a clear and concise statement of the facts. The purpose of the Board agent’s review is to determine if the charge states sufficient facts that, if proven, would constitute an unfair practice. It is incumbent upon the charging party to provide such facts to the Board agent. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 48 | 02/25/11 |
| 2167M | Antelope Valley Hospital District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case While the Board agent’s duties include assisting the charging party in stating the proper form of the charge, making inquiries and reviewing the charge and any accompanying materials, the duty remains with the charging party to provide a clear and concise statement of the facts. The purpose of the Board agent’s review is to determine if the charge states sufficient facts that, if proven, would constitute an unfair practice. It is incumbent upon the charging party to provide such facts to the Board agent, not merely to assert that the factual information will be made available at a later time. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 47 | 02/25/11 |
| 2150E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Thomas) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where charging party was aware that the union declined to support or assist her with her grievance, the limitations period began to run. Unfair practice charge filed approximately 15 months later was untimely. PERB is prohibited from issuing a complaint with respect to “any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge.” The limitations period begins to run once the charging party knows, or should have known, of the conduct underlying the charge. Board regulations allow for agents to provide technical assistance, not legal representation or interpretations of law, to complainants. Charging party’s claim that the limitations period should be extended because she spoke with a PERB agent within the six month statute of limitations, regarding her work complaints, and was not advised that she might have a claim against the union is without merit. Charging party bears the burden to identify the respondent and allege facts to state a prima facie violation of the Act. more or view all topics or full text. | 35 | 13 | 12/13/10 |
| 2125M | County of Fresno 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Unfair practice charge failed to demonstrate a unilateral change in policy where the County Board of Supervisors policy regarding mandatory furloughs was clearly established. County’s erroneous publication of personnel rules including a copy of the policy suggesting that BU 31 was exempt from the policy was not sufficient to show that the Board of Supervisors had in fact amended the policy to exempt BU 31. The implementation of furloughs represented the application of the existing policy. Unfair practice charge failed to demonstrate that implementation of furloughs was a unilateral change in policy where the County Board of Supervisors policy regarding mandatory furloughs was clearly established. Past practice will only be considered when necessary to determine an ambiguous policy. Past practice does not trump a clear established policy. Failure to enforce a policy does not mean an employer is forever precluded from doing so. Union argument that the parties bargaining history and past practice show that the MOU between the parties is plagued by mistake of fact is misplaced where the issue before PERB is not bad faith bargaining, but is the allegation of unilateral change of a County policy that is not set forth in the MOU. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 122 | 08/11/10 |
| 2092E | Desert Sands Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case EERA section 3541.5(a)(1) prohibits PERB from issuing a complaint with respect to any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge. This limitations period begins to run once the charging party knows, or should have known, of the conduct underlying the charge. A charging party must file a charge when it has actual or constructive notice of the respondent’s clear intent to implement a unilateral change in policy. Thus, a charging party that rests on its rights until actual implementation of the change bears the risk of running afoul of the statute of limitations. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 39 | 02/01/10 |
| 2092E | Desert Sands Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Unilateral changes are considered “per se” violations if certain criteria are met. Those criteria are: (1) the employer breached or altered the parties’ written agreement or past practice; (2) the action was taken without giving the exclusive representative notice or an opportunity to bargain over the change; (3) the action is not merely an isolated incident, but amounts to a change of policy (i.e., having a generalized effect or continuing impact on terms and conditions of employment); and (4) the change in policy concerns a matter within the scope of representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 39 | 02/01/10 |
| 1876Ha | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In order to establish an unlawful unilateral change, the charging party must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that: (1) the employer breached or altered the parties’ written agreement or past practice; (2) such action was taken without giving the exclusive representative notice or an opportunity to bargain over the change; (3) the change was not merely an isolated breach of the contract, but amounts to a change of policy (i.e., has a generalized effect or continuing impact upon the terms and conditions of employment of bargaining unit members); and (4) the change in policy concerns a matter within scope of representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 73 | 04/15/09 |
| 2112I | Los Angeles Superior Court 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge fails to establish a prima facie case where the charge merely states that the employer made staffing decisions based on unlawful animus and not legitimate business reasons. A charging party has the burden to allege the “who, what, when, where and how” of an unfair practice. Mere legal conclusions are not sufficient to state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 94 | 06/07/10 |
| 2109H | Regents of the University of California * * * OVERRULED by Culver City Employees Association v. City of Culver City (2020) PERB Decision No. 2731-M 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED ON OTHER GROUNDS by City of Culver City (2020) PERB Decision No. 2731-M. * * *Pleading or raising a bare allegation without sufficient supporting facts is insufficient for purposes of alleging a prima facie case. Where the charge alleged the employer violated past practice regarding sick leave verification and approval for vacation leave, a bare allegation that the practices were “well established,” was insufficient. The charge must allege facts to demonstrate the past practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 83 | 05/19/10 |
| 1983M | Menlo Park Fire Protection District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In order to establish a prima facie case for discrimination or retaliation under the MMBA, the charging party must show that: (1) the employee exercised rights under MMBA; (2) the employer had knowledge of the exercise of those rights; (3) the employer took adverse action against the employee; and (4) the employer took the action because of the exercise of those rights. The unfair practice charge failed to state a prima facie case of discrimination or retaliation because the facts alleged were insufficient to establish a nexus between the alleged adverse action and the employee’s protected conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 158 | 10/28/08 |
| 2082E | Ventura County Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case District’s charge sought a repugnancy review of an arbitration between the parties, however, it did not allege conduct by the Respondent/Federation that violated EERA and therefore did not establish a prima facie case against the respondent for violation of the Act. EERA section 3541.5(a)(2) addresses PERB’s authority relative to matters also covered by collective bargaining agreements between the parties, and provides that PERB may review an arbitration decision resulting from the parties’ grievance/arbitration process, to determine whether it is repugnant to the purposes of EERA. However, PERB’s authority remains limited to the issuance of a complaint that alleges respondent engaged in conduct that violates the EERA. A charge based solely on a claim that a third-party arbitration decision is repugnant cannot stand on its own and is insufficient to state a prima facie case for violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 34 | 14 | 12/09/09 |
| 1956M | Service Employees International Union Local 1292 (Marriott, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Amended charge filed after time prescribed by Board agent but prior to issuance of dismissal was still timely pursuant to PERB Regulation 32621. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 78 | 05/09/08 |
| 2009M | Kings In-Home Supportive Services Public Authority 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case At the charge processing stage, the burden to provide specific allegations of fact, which demonstrate a prima facie case that an unfair practice has been committed, is on the charging party. Additional facts provided by the respondent which expand the factual picture in the case and which were not contradicted by the charging party may be considered by PERB in determining whether the charge should be dismissed. The charging party does not, however, also have the burden of producing evidence of a prima facie case at this stage based on PERB Regulation 32620(b)(5). The single question at the charging stage is whether the charge alleged facts which, if true, constitute evidence of a violation. The regulations were designed to permit a determination that the facts as alleged in the charge state a legal cause of action and that the charging party is capable of providing admissible evidence in support of the allegations. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 52 | 03/10/09 |
| 2055M | Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB must dismiss a charge when the respondent can establish an affirmative defense as a matter of law based on undisputed facts. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 144 | 08/26/09 |
| 2021E | Alvord Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Unfair practice charge failed to state a prima facie case for retaliation because it failed to provide evidence demonstrating employer knowledge, failed to establish adverse employment action, and failed to provide evidence of nexus. Charging Party, a teacher, failed to provide evidence that a change in class teaching assignment and/or failure to provide certain educational resources, constituted an adverse impact on Charging Party’s employment. Additionally, the presence of a District supervisor at meetings where charging party engaged in protected activity was not sufficient to establish employer knowledge, where the supervisor was present in her capacity as a representative for the union and the charge failed to provide evidence to establish that the individual was an agent or representative of the District. In an unfair practice charge alleging interference, Charging Party has the burden of proving that the employer’s action harmed employee rights, constituting interference. In the absence of facts showing the employer’s actions in any way inhibited, or would tend to inhibit, the exercise of protected activity, allegations regarding the change to a teacher’s class assignment schedule and/or failure to provide certain educational resources, were not sufficient to show harm to employee rights. Pursuant to PERB Regulation 32635(b) “unless good cause is shown, a charging party may not present on appeal new allegations or new supporting evidence.” Charging Party failed to demonstrate good cause as to why these matters should be considered for the first time on appeal. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 76 | 04/30/09 |
| 2013S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case, a charging party must allege facts that are capable of being proven by admissible evidence. Allegation that employee organization reasserted its information request was based solely on statements made by and to a California State Mediation and Conciliation Service mediator during impasse mediation. Because Evidence Code section 1119(a) and (b) makes such evidence inadmissible in an administrative adjudication, it cannot support the issuance of a complaint. In the absence of any admissible evidence that the employee organization reasserted its information request, the charge failed to state a prima facie case of refusal to provide information. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 57 | 03/13/09 |
| 1984S | Service Employees International Union Local 1000 (George) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where a charging party fails to allege that any specific section of the Dills Act has been violated, the Board agent, upon a review of the charge, may determine under what section the charge should be analyzed. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 2 | 10/31/08 |
| 1977M | City of Long Beach 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Under PERB Regulation 32635(b), the Board may not consider new allegations or new supporting evidence on appeal unless the charging party establishes good cause. Good cause found to consider supporting evidence raised for the first time on appeal because the documents did not exist at the time the charge was dismissed. No good cause to consider remainder of new supporting evidence and new allegations raised on appeal when charging party knew of the evidence and allegations before dismissal of the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 140 | 09/16/08 |
| 1918S | Union of American Physicians and Dentists (Menaster) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party’s charge under Dills Act section 3516 is dismissed where it is unclear under what theory this provision would have applicability to the circumstances presented in the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 135 | 08/09/07 |
| 1858E | California School Employees Association and Its Chapter 198 (Bruce) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party failed to state a prima facie case that the Association violated its duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 31 | 3 | 09/07/06 |
| 1855H | Coalition of University Employees (Higgins) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party failed to state a prima facie case that the Association violated its duty of fair representation. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 157 | 08/29/06 |
| 1851H | Regents of the University of California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A letter correctly addressed and properly mailed is presumed to have been received in the ordinary course of mail. This presumption can be rebutted by evidence that the letter was not received. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 153 | 08/21/06 |
| 1828E | Los Banos Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A charging party must provide a clear and concise statement of the facts alleged to constitute an unfair practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 86 | 03/09/06 |
| 1827E | Los Angeles Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In determining whether to issue a complaint, the Board agent is to assume that the essential facts alleged in the charge are true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 85 | 03/08/06 |
| 1831H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Booth) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board agent acted outside scope of duties and outside Board’s jurisdiction in allowing exclusive representative to change timeline set forth for filing objections in PERB Regulation 32994(b)(3). more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 102 | 03/13/06 |
| 1829H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Hermanson) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board agent acted outside scope of duties and outside Board’s jurisdiction in allowing exclusive representative to change timeline set forth for filing objections in PERB Regulation 32994(b)(3). more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 99 | 03/10/06 |
| 1804H | Regents of the University of California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) requires that an unfair practice charge include a "clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice." Thus, the charging party's burden includes alleging the "who, what, when, where and how" of an unfair practice. Mere legal conclusions are not sufficient to state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 44 | 01/04/06 |
| 1810H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Baratelli) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 53 | 01/18/06 |
| 1811H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America, Local 9119 (Crisosto) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 55 | 01/18/06 |
| 1812H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Bailey) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 54 | 01/18/06 |
| 1784H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Abernathy, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 9 | 12/01/05 |
| 1800H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Lee) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 41 | 12/30/05 |
| 1801H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Joshel) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 42 | 12/30/05 |
| 1802H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Widman) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 43 | 12/30/05 |
| 1803H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Brooks) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 45 | 12/30/05 |
| 1806S | State of California (Department of Corrections) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A letter correctly addressed and properly mailed is presumed to have been received in the ordinary course of mail. This presumption can be rebutted by evidence that the letter was not received. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 46 | 01/05/06 |
| 1798H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Van Sluis) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 39 | 12/30/05 |
| 1799H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Cooper) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 40 | 12/30/05 |
| 1794H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Gill, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 35 | 12/30/05 |
| 1795H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Chanes, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 36 | 12/30/05 |
| 1796H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Welch, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 37 | 12/30/05 |
| 1797H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Boylan) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 38 | 12/30/05 |
| 1792H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Aldern, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 33 | 12/30/05 |
| 1793H | University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Carter, et al.) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 34 | 12/30/05 |
| 1759E | Stockton Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In the absence of a clear and concise statement of facts showing a District past practice of always granting release time requests, Board is inclined to give more weight to District’s evidence. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 104 | 03/28/05 |
| 1717E | Parlier Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where contract language is ambiguous, to determine whether there is a prima facie case, charging party’s interpretation of the language must be accepted as true where it is reasonable. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 23 | 11/30/04 |
| 1616E | San Juan Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The Association has not established a past practice for which elimination of shared positions requires consent of the affected teachers. The collective bargaining agreement merely sets up a committee to create guidelines for addressing the mechanics of such positions. The only other related collective bargain agreement provision covers a pre-retirement work program, which does not apply to the positions at issue. The Board must assume that the essential facts alleged in the charge are true. Disputed facts must be resolved under the Board’s hearing process. Therefore, the allegation concerning the teachers’ shared position, that the Association learned of the elimination of the shared contract position within the limitations period, is timely. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 128 | 04/05/04 |
| 1606E | California School Employees Association-Chapter 244 (Guitierrez) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In determining whether the charging party has stated a prima facie case, the Board must credit the charging party’s allegations of facts over those of other parties. When the charging party offers conflicting versions of the facts, the one most favorable will be credited. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 93 | 02/26/04 |
| 1690S | State of California (Department of Forestry and Fire Protection) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging Party must show protected conduct, that the employer knew of protected conduct and a nexus between the protected conduct and any adverse actions. Charge must include facts to show what actions occurred. Mere statement that there was a premeditated conspiracy is not sufficient. Charging party must allege “who what when where and how” of charge.(see State of California (Dept. of Food and Agriculture)(1994) PERB Decision No. 944. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 254 | 09/17/04 |
| 1655M | Marin County Law Library 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Activity must be protected activity and their must be a nexus with adverse action to establish a prima facie case of unfair labor practice. Where the activities of charging party were not protected activity, and no nexus was established with adverse action, there was no prima facie case established. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 195 | 07/02/04 |
| 1658H | Trustees of the California State University 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Without specific facts, it has not been demonstrated that a change occurred. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 199 | 07/13/04 |
| 1609H | Trustees of the California State University (San Bernardino) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party must provide a clear and concise statement of facts; submitting a charge that does not clearly state what type of unfair practice violation is alleged is not sufficient. The burden is on the charging party to provide a clear and concise statement of the relevant facts. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 123 | 04/02/04 |
| 1568E | Long Beach Community College District * * * OVERRULED by Long Beach Community College District (2008) PERB Decision No. 1941 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Long Beach Community College District (2008) PERB Decision No. 1941. * * *Regional attorney may consider affirmative defenses if they raise questions of law. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 33 | 12/18/03 |
| 1544E | Oakland Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The statement “within the past six months” does not specify a time of violation sufficient to make the charge timely. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 112 | 07/23/03 |
| 1610M | Service Employees International Union Local 250 (Stewart) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Allegations that union steward was “threatened” and labeled a “troublemaker” by her union fail to provide the factual specificity necessary to state a prima facie case of interference. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 125 | 04/02/04 |
| 1585H | Regents of the University of California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party must provide a clear and concise statement of facts; submitting a charge with 300 pages of attachments does not meet this standard. In the warning letter, Board agent should advise charging party of deficiencies, however, burden is still upon charging party to provide clear and concise statement of facts. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 62 | 01/15/04 |
| 1592H | Regents of the University of California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge must include all material facts necessary to establish a prima facie case. This must be done by providing a clear and concise statement of facts. A charge that contains only a brief conclusory statement followed by 300 pages of supporting materials fails to meet this standard. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 69 | 01/28/04 |
| 1594E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Kestin) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board dismissed charge for failure to provide a clear and concise statement of facts where charging party failed to file an amended charge correcting the deficiencies. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 74 | 02/09/04 |
| 1570M | County of San Joaquin 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case It is well-settled that a Board agent must accept the plain language of the contract or rule where it is clear and unambiguous. However, where the contract language or rule is unclear or ambiguous, the Board has held that the parties should be given an opportunity to offer evidence to support their differing interpretations at an evidentiary hearing. In light of union’s factual allegations, Board cannot find the local rule at issue to be clear and unambiguous. To the contrary, the local rule appears to be reasonably susceptible to the interpretation offered by the union. Accordingly, union has established a prima facie case and a complaint should issue. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 37 | 12/19/03 |
| 1552E | Los Angeles Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Walnut Valley Unified School District (2016) PERB Decision No. 2495 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Walnut Valley Unified School District (2016) PERB Decision No. 2495. * * *Bailey failed to provide specifics supporting her charge regarding her complaints about a subordinate and about her supervisor as required by PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) and so there is insufficient information to determine whether she engaged in protected conduct. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 7 | 10/21/03 |
| 1529E | Oakland Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Temporal proximity is shown when an employee sends two memoranda containing teacher complaints to the school principal and is placed on administrative leave four days later. An employer’s disparate treatment of an employee is shown where, in an argument between two District employees, only one is subsequently placed on administrative leave. That the District did not offer the employee justification for placing him on administrative leave pending an investigation until a later time and never informed him of the results of the investigation, is evidence of nexus. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 91 | 06/20/03 |
| 1539M | City of Folsom 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Siroky did not allege that a proposed settlement agreement which precluded the City from recovering an attorneys’ fee award against him, was executed by the parties. Therefore, City’s attempt to recover the fee award is not an adverse action. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 99 | 06/26/03 |
| 1428H | Regents of the University of California 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A charging party should allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of an unfair practice. The assertion that UC violated its own internet/e-mail policies, or allowed use of other University services without more specificity, did not demonstrate that UC had violated the required neutrality of HEERA; p. 2-3, dismissal letter. Charging party provided no facts to support its contention that NoFee4Me was a competing employee organization within the definition of employee organization found in HEERA nor that the employer was treating them with any preference . Therefore, it failed to demonstrate that the University interfered with the internal activities of the employee organization; p. 3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32059 | 04/19/01 |
| 1418E | Peralta Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Failure of Charging Party to keep PERB informed of her current address and to communicate with PERB in an effective and timely manner does not constitute good cause under regulation 32635(b) for PERB to consider new supporting evidence offered for the first time on appeal to the Board. more or view all topics or full text. | 25 | 32037 | 02/26/01 |
| 1378E | Long Beach Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The Board has held that factual allegations offered by a charging party are to be considered true for purposes of determining whether there has been a prima facie showing of a violation, citing San Juan Unified School District (1977) EERB Decision No. 12; p. 5. The phrase "completion of negotiations" is ambiguous and thus the Board looks to other evidence to ascertain meaning. Charging party asserts that no ratification of the agreement was required before negotiations were complete, and thus a prima facie case had been established. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31063 | 02/28/00 |
| 1512E | Oakland Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The allegation that employer’s human resources director appeared to withdraw his support for the employee and stop protection her from disciplinary action is too conclusory and remote to establish a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 45 | 03/25/03 |
| 1377E | Los Angeles Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where amended charge does not address an allegation found insufficient in the warning letter, the allegation is dismissed. In Temple City Unified School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 843, the Board stated that a Regional Attorney may not resolve disputes of material facts between a Charging Party and a Respondent. However, the factual dispute presented here is not the type of factual dispute discussed in Temple City. Here Charging Party provided documents that demonstrate his allegations were false. This type of dispute may be resolved by a Board Agent in the investigation of a charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 24 | 31062 | 02/28/00 |
| 1352E | American Federation of Teachers, et al. (Kok) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party must provide facts demonstrating a prima facie violation; mere legal conclusions are insufficient. State of California, Department of Food and Agriculture (1994) PERB Decision No. 1071-S. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30172 | 09/29/99 |
| 1325E | Los Angeles Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Allegations that a newpaper article and a failure to follow proper evaluation procedures supported a finding of nexus are not credit because facts do not support the allegations. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30096 | 04/13/99 |
| 1326E | Chino Valley Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Based on a review of the original and amended charges, the Board concluded that the Union has demonstrated multiple indicators of bad faith conduct by the District sufficient to state a prima facie case of an EERA violation; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30097 | 04/14/99 |
| 1228E | Little Lake School District (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge must allege the "who, what, when, where and how" of an unfair practice charge United Teachers of Los Angeles (Ragsdale) (1992) PERB Decision No. 944; p. 3, warning letter. Mere legal conclusions without sufficient supporting facts are insufficient to state a prima facie case; p. 3, warning letter. Sending a letter to PERB is not equivalent to filing an unfair practice charge; p. 3, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29008 | 11/13/97 |
| 1229E | Sulphur Springs Union Elementary School District (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge must allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of an unfair practice charge United Teachers of Los Angeles (Ragsdale) (1992) PERB Decision No. 944; p. 4, warning letter. Mere legal conclusions without sufficient supporting facts are insufficient to state a prima facie case; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29009 | 11/13/97 |
| 1230E | Centinela Valley Union High School District (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge must allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of an unfair practice charge United Teachers of Los Angeles (Ragsdale) (1992) PERB Decision No. 944; p. 4, warning letter. Mere legal conclusions without sufficient supporting facts are insufficient to state a prima facie case; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 22 | 29010 | 11/13/97 |
| 1178E | Santa Clarita Community College District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Nexus not demonstrated where allegation of disparate treatment not supported by specific evidence. Nexus not demonstrated where allegation of cursory investigation not supported by other evidence gathered during investigation. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28018 | 12/04/96 |
| 1182H | Regents of University of California (University Professional and Technical Employees) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The charging party must establish timeliness as part of its prima facie case; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28045 | 01/31/97 |
| 1167E | Ventura County Community College District (Mickle) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) provides that a charge must contain a "clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice;" a charging party must allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of the unfair practice; mere legal conclusions are insufficient; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27136 | 09/11/96 |
| 1168E | Service Employees International Union, Local 535 (Mickle) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) provides that a charge must contain a "clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice;" a charging party must allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of the unfair practice; mere legal conclusions are insufficient; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27137 | 09/11/96 |
| 1163E | Arcata Elementary School District * * * OVERRULED by Huntington Beach Union High School District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1525 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Huntington Beach Union High School District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1525, pp. 2-10, where the Board held a change in work hours for a vacant position falls within the scope of representation, even where the change is prompted by an employer’s decision to alter its nature, direction, or level of service. * * *In unilateral change of hours of vacant position, it is the employer's burden to show the change was not within the scope of bargaining because the change was based on factors other than labor cost considerations. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27120 | 06/26/96 |
| 1157H | Regents of the University of California (California Nurses Association) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The Board presumes the truth of facts alleged in unfair practice charge; pp. 3-4. more or view all topics or full text. | 20 | 27111 | 06/13/96 |
| 1118E | Alum Rock Education Association (Kirkaldie) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Conclusory statements must be supported by the underlying facts alleged in the charge or the charge will be dismissed; p. 11, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26143 | 10/04/95 |
| 1105E | Pomona Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge failed to establish prima facie case of unlawful support to another employee organization because it did not allege any facts showing that release of employee home addresses occurred through an agent of the respondent acting within the scope of his or her authority or that the respondent was directly or indirectly involved with the release of information; p. 2, warning letter. There appears to be no legal basis for finding a violation of EERA if a respondent was merely negligent about safeguarding information; p. 3, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26098 | 05/18/95 |
| 1094H | California State University (Academic Professionals of California) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge that employer engaged in unilateral changes and repudiation of the CBA need not be accepted as true where, as in the present case, they are not supported by factual allegations; p. 5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26080 | 04/06/95 |
| 1070E | Davis Teachers Association (Carlson) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The burden is on the charging party to allege facts which both establish a prima facie violation and the timeliness of the charge; p. 2, dismissal letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26025 | 11/29/94 |
| 1071S | State of California (Food and Agriculture) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case 32615(a)(5) states that a charge shall contain a "clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice." A charging party should allege the "who, what, when, where and how" of an unfair practice. Legal conclusions are not enough; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 19 | 26028 | 11/30/94 |
| 1024E | Tehachapi Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party failed to meet its burden of alleging dates to show that the alleged unlawful conduct occurred within the six-month limitations period; pp. 3-4. more or view all topics or full text. | 18 | 25008 | 11/04/93 |
| 1014S | California State Employees Association (Garcia) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case For review of an unfair practice charge, the factual allegations contained in the charge are considered true; p. 6. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24153 | 09/21/93 |
| 1019E | Apple Valley Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case A charge alleging reprisal which does not state who was the subject of reprisal, the nature of the protected activity, or a nexus indicating that the adverse action was taken because of the individuals protected activity is inadequate to state a prima facie case; p. 2, dismissal letter. In the face of unambiguous contractual language, a vague and conclusory allegation about the "intention of the parties" unsupported by clear factual allegations is inadequate to state a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24170 | 10/21/93 |
| 1011E | Mark West Union School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case In determining whether to issue a complaint, the Board agent is to assume that the essential facts alleged in the charge are true; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24149 | 09/02/93 |
| 0963E | Apple Valley Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charge will be dismissed if sufficient facts not alleged to clearly and concisely demonstrate a prima facie case; p. 1, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 17 | 24020 | 12/07/92 |
| 0952E | Sacramento City Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Failure to state a prima facie case of unilateral change as charging party failed to demonstrate that the employer refused to bargain over the decision to transfer bargaining unit work nor was it demonstrated that a recent request to bargain would be futile; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23152 | 09/10/92 |
| 0901E | San Diego Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case As the alleged conduct occurred beyond the six-month statute of limitations, the unfair practice charge must be dismissed; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22153 | 09/19/91 |
| 0898E | California School Employees Association (Lohmann) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Pleading a bare allegation without sufficient supporting facts is insufficient for purposes of alleging a prima facie case. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22138 | 08/30/91 |
| 0890H | California State University (California State Employees Association/Service Employees International Union Local 1000) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case 3751(b) allegation failed to state a prima facie case, as under HEERA, employee organizations have not been granted a general and independent statutory right to represent unit members in their employment relations with their employer; p. 5, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22108 | 06/19/91 |
| 0883E | Lodi Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Failure to state a prima facie case of unilateral change where district conduct in accord with parties' agreements and current practice. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22095 | 05/30/91 |
| 0876E | Glendora Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Without factual allegations identifying evidence to support a particular interpretation, the Board agent is not required to accept the charging party's conclusory allegations regarding the interpretation of the contract. Rather, the Board agent is free to examine the contract and, by reference to its terms only, determine its meaning; pp. 8-9. Where contract language is clear and unambiguous on its face it is unnecessary to go beyond the language of the contract itself to ascertain its meaning. Thus, Board agent did not exceed his authority nor decide the ultimate issue when he rejected the Association's unsupported and conclusory allegations concerning the interpretation of the contract; p. 10. A hearing is warranted where the facts of the charge establish a legitimate dispute over the meaning of the contract; fn. 4. A hearing is warranted where the facts of the charge establish a legitimate dispute over the meaning of the contract; fn. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22082 | 05/16/91 |
| 0873E | Charter Oak Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case For determining whether the charge states a prima facie case, the factual allegations in the charge are deemed true. However, factually unsupported legal conclusions in the charge need not be accepted as true; fn. 6. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22067 | 04/04/91 |
| 0874E | Los Angeles Unified School District (Woods) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board remanded case in which ALJ mislead charging party as to the scope of evidence he could present re: protected activity. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22069 | 04/10/91 |
| 0858H | Regents of the University of California (Smith) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party alleged no facts to show that the employer's conduct was intended to be retaliatory; p. 2, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22011 | 12/17/90 |
| 0853H | California State University (Jenkins) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; 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. more or view all topics or full text. | 15 | 22000 | 12/05/90 |
| 0843E | Temple City Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Charter Oak Unified School District (1991) PERB Order No. 873-E 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED IN PART ON OTHER GROUNDS by Charter Oak Unified School District (1991) PERB Decision No. 873. * * *Board reversed Board agent partial dismissal on ground that prima facie violation of section 3543.5(e) was alleged by union. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21191 | 09/28/90 |
| 0826H | Regents of the University of California (University of California-American Federation of Teachers) * * * OVERRULED by Long Beach Community College District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1564 and Los Angeles Unified School District (2014) PERB Decision No. 2359 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * OVERRULED by Long Beach Community College District (2003) PERB Decision No. 1564 and Los Angeles Unified School District (2014) PERB Decision No. 2359, where the Board held that the statute of limitations is not jurisdictional, but is an affirmative defense. The burden of proof that equitable tolling does not apply is with the respondent. * * *It is the charging party's burden as part of the prima facie case to prove timeliness. more or view all topics or full text. | 14 | 21142 | 07/03/90 |
| 2485E | Petaluma City Elementary School District/Joint Union High School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case An unfair practice charge should not be dismissed without a hearing, based on an affirmative defense not raised during the investigation of the charge. p. 52. more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 23 | 06/30/16 |
| 1946E | San Mateo County Office of Education 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The central dispute surrounds whether or not the charging party alleged sufficient facts to support the allegation that his employer’s reprimand was issued because of his protected conduct and thereby retaliation. Although a charging party’s facts will be taken as true at this stage of review, a charge must still contain a “clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice” in accordance with PERB Regulation 32615(a)(5) and San Juan Unified School District (1977) EERB Decision No. 12. more or view all topics or full text. | 32 | 48 | 02/29/08 |
| 1755H | Trustees of the California State University (Sonoma) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Where there is a material factual dispute during the initial investigation, the charging party's allegations must be accepted as true, citing Golden Plains Unified School District (2002) PERB Decision No. 1489; p. 6. more or view all topics or full text. | 29 | 97 | 03/01/05 |
| 1215S | State of California (Department of Youth Authority) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case The charging party's burden is to include the who, what, when, where and how of an unfair practice. (State of California (Department of Food and Agriculture) (1994) PERB Decision No. 1071-S, citing United Teachers-Los Angeles (Ragsdale) (1992) PERB Decision No. 944.) Legal conclusions are insufficient to state a prima facie case. (Charter Oak Unified School District (1991) PERB Decision No. 873.) more or view all topics or full text. | 21 | 28143 | 08/11/97 |
| 0466E | Eastside Union School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board agent may not rely on a party's ex parte representation of facts to support dismissal of charge; Board agent not empowered to rule on the merits of the charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 9 | 16037 | 12/19/84 |
| 0385E | Los Angeles Community College District (Watts) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Service of complaint after dismissal does not transform a complaint otherwise failing to state a prima facie violation into one that does; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 8 | 15087 | 05/22/84 |
| 0309E | Los Angeles Community College District (Kimmett) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Merely asserting that sufficient facts were alleged in the original charge without explaining why they constitute a prima facie case fails to satisfy the requirements for an appeal; p. 6. Charges concerning public notice must be filed as public notice complaints pursuant to expedited proceeding in PERB regulations and not as unfair practice charges; p. 5. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14155 | 05/18/83 |
| 0302S | State of California (Department of General Services) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case As the unfair practice charge alleged significant unilateral changes during election campaign, Board concluded that charge should not have been dismissed and ordered that a complaint issue; pp. 6-7. more or view all topics or full text. | 7 | 14132 | 04/08/83 |
| 0944E | United Teachers Los Angeles (Ragsdale) * * * CLARIFIED by National Union of Healthcare Workers (2012) PERB Decision No. 2249-M 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case * * * CLARIFIED by National Union of Healthcare Workers (2012) PERB Decision No. 2249-M, where the Board rejected a formulaic application of the Ragsdale standard in favor of an analysis focusing on the prima facie elements of the alleged unfair practice and the sufficiency of the charging party’s allegations in relation to each of those elements. (See also, e.g., Santa Maria Joint Union High School District (2015) PERB Decision No. 2445, p. 13 fn. 14.) * * *Charging party must allege with specificity who, what, when, where how the union's activities were arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. Mere speculation, conjecture or legal conclusions are insufficient; p. 6, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23098 | 06/23/92 |
| 0946Ea | United Teachers-Los Angeles (Moszkowski) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case To state a prima facie violation of EERA section 3543.6(b), the charging party must show that the exclusive representative's conduct was arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith; p. 2. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23153 | 09/11/92 |
| 0936E | Lindsay Unified School District 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Unorganized notes and exhibits with no apparent connection to the case do not meet the requirement of Regulation 32615 which mandates a clear and concise statement of the facts. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23083 | 05/22/92 |
| 0927S | State of California (Governor Pete Wilson) (Association of California State Attorneys and Administrative Law Judges; Professional Engineers in California Government; California Association of Professional Scientists) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board summarily affirms dismissal of charge that Governor violated 3516.5, and 3519(b) and (c) of Dills by failing to give unions notice and opportunity to bargain before proposing initiative which would allow him, in state of fiscal emergency, to furlough or reduce salaries of state employees, to the Attorney General or people of the state. Matters at issue found not to be within the scope of representation because: (1) the mediatory influence of collective bargaining is not suited to the resolution of this conflict; and (2) such obligation would unduly abridge employers' freedom to exercise managerial prerogative. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23061 | 04/13/92 |
| 0928S | State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (International Union of Operating Engineers Local 39) 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Board summarily affirms dismissal of charge that DPA violated 3516.5, and 3519(a), (b), and (c) of Dills by failing to give unions notice and opportunity to bargain before proposing an initiative to the Attorney General or people of the state which would allow the Governor, in state of fiscal emergency, to furlough or reduce salaries of state employees. Matters at issue found not to be within the scope of representation because: (1) the mediatory influence of collective bargaining is not suited to the resolution of this conflict; and (2) such obligation would unduly abridge employers' freedom to exercise managerial prerogative. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23063 | 04/20/92 |
| 0913E | Monterey County Office of Education 1100.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; In General/Prima Facie Case Charging party's allegations sufficient to state a prima facie case where the unfair practice charge lacked in specifics and could have been stated with greater clarity; p. 4. more or view all topics or full text. | 16 | 23009 | 12/13/91 |