All notes for Subtopic 1100.02000 – Investigation of Charge

DecisionDescriptionPERC Vol.PERC IndexDate
2670M * * * JUDICIAL APPEAL PENDING * * * County of Santa Clara
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Under PERB Regulation 32147, the Board itself may expedite the processing of a case presenting an important question of law, the early resolution of which is likely to improve labor relations, at all levels before PERB. (pp. 11-12.) more or view all topics or full text.
09/20/19
2622E Cabrillo Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
4312602/04/19
2548E Lake Elsinore Unified School District (Edwards)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
4210202/02/18
2548E Lake Elsinore Unified School District (Edwards)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
4210202/02/18
2522H Trustees of the California State University
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
4115003/20/17
2522H Trustees of the California State University
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
4115003/20/17
2514E Santa Ana Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Position statements and other materials filed with the Board as part of its pre-hearing investigation are not confidential. PERB Regulation 32620, subdivision (c), expressly requires that a respondent’s position statement be served on the charging party and, in this case, the party asserting confidentiality provided no statutory or decisional authority exempting its position statement from disclosure as a public record under the California Public Records Act. (p. 3, fn. 7.) Similarly, although diagnoses, treatments and other medical information may be subject to a right of privacy, a charging party has no right to submit documentation ex parte to a hearing officer and keep it from the respondent, if such information is to be used as the basis for a decision affecting the case, including whether to place the matter in abeyance. (p. 32, fn. 35.) more or view all topics or full text.
4113202/08/17
2505M City of Roseville
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
419711/30/16
2505M City of Roseville
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
419711/30/16
2505M City of Roseville
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
419711/30/16
2505M City of Roseville
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
419711/30/16
2452E Hartnell Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
The charging party is not required to provide legal authority or identify the legal theory or theories of the case. PERB will disregard discrepancies or omissions in the specific statutory provisions cited by a charging party and focus instead on the substantive theories of liability implicated by the charging party’s factual allegations. Where charging party alleges facts that support separate interference and discrimination allegations, PERB should consider both theories. pp. 50, fn. 20, 53-54. more or view all topics or full text.
405609/04/15
2475E United Teachers of Los Angeles (Raines, et al)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
PERB’s regulations neither expressly authorize nor prohibit processing unfair practice charges as class or representative actions and PERB may consolidate separately-filed charges including the same or overlapping allegations to promote administrative efficiency. more or view all topics or full text.
4014702/29/16
2431M County of Santa Clara
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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. Although a Board agent must accept the plain language of a contract or local rule where it is clear and unambiguous, where there is a legitimate dispute over the meaning of a contract or local rule, the parties must be afforded the opportunity to offer evidence in support of their respective contentions before the matter is dismissed. The question is not whether the charging party has asserted the most plausible interpretation of a contract or local rule, but whether it has asserted a plausible, i.e., non-frivolous interpretation that supports a prima facie allegation of an unfair practice. The Board reversed dismissal of a charge alleging a unilateral change from expired contract provision and established practice where contract language at issue was reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning and respondent’s position statement included evidence supporting existence of established practice alleged by the charging party. more or view all topics or full text.
3918106/10/15
2445E Santa Maria Joint Union High School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Factual allegations in a related unfair practice charge, where not contradicted or disputed by the charging party, can be relied on to provide a more complete picture of the relevant factual circumstances of the charge under investigation. Although PERB Regulation 32620, subdivision (d), requires the Board agent to advise the charging party in writing of any charge deficiencies in a warning letter, an amendment to a charge does not necessarily require issuance of a second warning letter; while the Board agent has the duty to assist a charging party to state the required information in proper form and answer procedural questions, they have no duty beyond the initial warning letter to assist the charging party in perfecting their charge; the decision whether to issue more than one warning letter in any particular case lies within the sole discretion of the Office of the General Counsel. more or view all topics or full text.
403807/31/15
2453E Cabrillo Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Because this case is an appeal from a dismissal and refusal to issue a complaint by the Office of the General Counsel, our inquiry at this stage is focused on the sufficiency of the charging party’s allegations. In addition, we may also consider information provided by the respondent, but only when such information is submitted under oath, complements without contradicting the facts alleged in the charge, and is not disputed by the charging party. 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. Because the function of a Board agent investigating a charge is not to weigh evidence, determine credibility or make findings of fact, it is generally not appropriate at this stage of the proceedings to determine the employer’s true motive for taking adverse action. more or view all topics or full text.
405709/17/15
2411E Berkeley Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where attachments to an unfair practice charge are not properly identified, placed in a logical order or cross-referenced in the unfair practice charge or narrative statement of the charge, only those with obvious relevance to the charge allegations will be considered as evidence supporting the charge; while the powers of the Board agent include assisting the party to state in proper form the required information, it is not the Board agent’s responsibility to sift through charging party’s attachments and determine their possible relevance to the charge allegations where the charging party simply provided the Board agent a stack of documents without having made an earnest effort to eliminate duplicates, place them in logical order, ensure their authenticity and identify through labeling and cross-referencing how they are relevant and support the allegations of the charge. more or view all topics or full text.
399802/19/15
2384H Trustees of the California State University
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
As part of PERB’s authority to investigate and remedy unfair practices, the Board may sever, consolidate, expedite, place in abeyance, or otherwise alter the timeline(s) or sequence in which it investigates some or all of the allegations in a charge to promote uniformity in decisions and administrative efficiency. Here, the Board directed that issuance of a complaint on one allegation be held in abeyance until the remainder of the charge has been fully investigated, so that one complaint, including all matters deemed appropriate for hearing, would be processed on the same timeline. more or view all topics or full text.
391606/30/14
2299E Los Angeles Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
12/20/12
2253H University Professional and Technical Employees-Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Witke)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
In processing an unfair practice charge, a Board agent may freely communicate with the parties to facilitate the gathering of information necessary to the investigation of the charge; there is no prohibition on ex parte communications in the charge processing stage of an unfair practice proceeding; ex parte communications at the charge processing stage of unfair practice proceedings are a routine and necessary part of Board agent regulatory duties and enable them to assist a charging party in formulating a charge, answer procedural questions, facilitate communication between the parties and make inquiries, as required under PERB regulations. more or view all topics or full text.
3616104/23/12
2301C Los Angeles Superior Court
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
12/21/12
2288M City of Pinole
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
10/15/12
2205E United Teachers of Los Angeles (Adams)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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 ultimate responsibility remains with the charging party to provide a clear and concise statement of the facts constituting a prima facie case. The Board agent fulfilled his duties to assist the charging party in stating the proper form of the charge when he allowed the charging party to amend the charge three times, spoke with charging party by phone at least once and issued two warning letters to the charging party. A fixed anticipatory prejudgment against a party must be shown to establish prejudice sufficient for Board agent disqualification. Such prejudgment is established through statements or conduct by the Board agent indicating a clear predisposition against a party. Adverse rulings by a Board agent against a party in a previous case, or erroneous legal or factual rulings, do not alone indicate prejudice. There can be no bias attributed to a Board agent based on an earlier dismissal of a different charge by a different Board agent. An adverse ruling on a legal issue is not of itself sufficient to indicate bias. more or view all topics or full text.
365209/27/11
2168M Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West Local 2005 (Hayes)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
354802/25/11
2167M Antelope Valley Hospital District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
354702/25/11
2129E Sacramento City Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
To determine whether a charge alleges a prima facie case, the Board agent must assume that the essential facts alleged in the charge are true. If the Board agent’s investigation reveals conflicting issues of material fact, the conflict must be resolved via PERB’s hearing process; the Board agent may not resolve the conflict at the investigation stage. more or view all topics or full text.
3413409/03/10
2111S State of California (Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Avenal State Prison)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where a charging party fails to allege that any specific section of the Government Code has been violated, the Board agent, upon review of the charge, may determine under what section the charge should be analyzed. more or view all topics or full text.
349106/03/10
2061E Oakland Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
The PERB General Counsel's Office will issue a complaint if the charging party has alleged facts that, if proven true in a subsequent hearing, would state a prima facie violation of EERA. more or view all topics or full text.
3315309/10/09
2055M Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
3314408/26/09
1838M Sacramento Municipal Utility District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
An amendment to unfair practice charge must be timely filed. An amendment filed after a dismissal has issued is not timely. more or view all topics or full text.
3011705/10/06
1935E Los Banos Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where charging party fails to allege that any specific section of the Government Code has been violated, a 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.
321712/21/07
1917M Service Employees International Union, Local 715 (Langlois-Dul, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Investigation of Charge. Because the warning and dismissal letters were addressed to the wrong zip code, and allegedly never reached the charging party, the Board vacated the dismissal, restored the case to the status quo that existed immediately before the issuance of the warning letter, and remanded the case to the Office of the General Counsel for the re-issuance of the warning letter and for further investigation and processing. more or view all topics or full text.
3113408/02/07
1831H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Booth)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
3010203/13/06
1824M County of Alameda
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where some allegations of charge are not addressed by Board agent in warning letter, the charge is remanded to the Office of the General Counsel for further investigation. more or view all topics or full text.
307703/01/06
1829H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Hermanson)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
309903/10/06
1810H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Baratelli)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
305301/18/06
1811H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America, Local 9119 (Crisosto)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
305501/18/06
1812H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Bailey)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
305401/18/06
1784H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Abernathy, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
30912/01/05
1800H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Lee)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
304112/30/05
1801H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Joshel)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
304212/30/05
1802H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Widman)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
304312/30/05
1803H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Brooks)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
304512/30/05
1793H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Carter, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
303412/30/05
1794H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Gill, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
303512/30/05
1795H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Chanes, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
303612/30/05
1796H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Welch, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
303712/30/05
1797H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Boylan)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text.
303812/30/05
1798H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Van Sluis)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text.
303912/30/05
1799H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Cooper)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where there is material factual dispute the charging party’s allegations must be accepted as true. more or view all topics or full text.
304012/30/05
1792H University Professional and Technical Employees, Communications Workers of America Local 9119 (Aldern, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
303312/30/05
1762S State of California (Department of Consumer Affairs)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
The Board agent fulfilled the requirements of PERB Regulation 32620 in processing the charge. As required by PERB Regulation 32635, the appeal did not provide facts supporting its allegations that the Board agent did not properly investigate the charge, used ex parte communications with the State in rendering his decision and failed to determine whether the charge should be deferred to arbitration. 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.” more or view all topics or full text.
2912104/15/05
1764E United Educators of San Francisco (Banos)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Board agent should not rely on respondent’s position statement where it was not first served on charging party. more or view all topics or full text.
2912404/21/05
1730E San Francisco Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Deferral to arbitration is not appropriate in this matter. The party who asserts deferral as an affirmative defense must allege facts that evidence the three prongs required by Collyer Insulated Wire. Neither party has summarized or attached a copy of the current CBA provision alleged to have been violated and so it is impossible to determine if the grievance and charge cover the same subject. more or view all topics or full text.
294612/27/04
1639E Salinas Union High School District * * * OVERRULED by Trustees of California State University (2012) PERB Decision No. 2287-H
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
The District’s requirement to provide instruction during the enrichment period for the first time does not involve performance of new duties but rather an alleged increase in instructional time. Changes in the length of an instructional day are a management prerogative except when such changes impact the length of the employees’ workday or duty-free time. The burden is on the charging party to show such impact. The Federation did not state facts demonstrating an impact on the length of the employees’ workday or duty-free time. more or view all topics or full text.
2817606/14/04
1606E California School Employees Association-Chapter 244 (Guitierrez)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
289302/26/04
A338M Marin County Law Library
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Amendment to unfair practice charge must be timely filed. Amendment filed after dismissal has issued is not timely. Once dismissal has issued board agent no longer has jurisdiction and charge cannot be further amended. more or view all topics or full text.
2821107/02/04
1568E Long Beach Community College District * * * OVERRULED by Long Beach Community College District (2008) PERB Decision No. 1941
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Regional attorney may consider affirmative defenses if they raise questions of law. more or view all topics or full text.
283312/18/03
1575E Chula Vista Elementary Educators Association (Larkins)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
In investigating a charge, material facts submitted by the Respondent cannot be accepted as true where disputed by charging party. more or view all topics or full text.
284212/30/03
1557E Chula Vista Elementary School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Failure to specifically discuss each allegation by the Board agent did not require reversal of the dismissal because the allegations, when treated as true did not state a prima facie case. Use of respondent’s facts where not in conflict with charging party’s allegations is proper. more or view all topics or full text.
281411/20/03
1632M Service Employees International Union #790 (Adza)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Nothing in PERB case law requires a Board agent to ignore facts provided by the Respondent and consider only the facts provided by the Charging Party. more or view all topics or full text.
2815405/19/04
1610M Service Employees International Union Local 250 (Stewart)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
2812504/02/04
1603E Shasta College Faculty Association (Sloan)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Charging party’s argument on appeal that he did not receive enough time to file an amended charge rejected where charging party received one extension and failed to request additional time. more or view all topics or full text.
289002/25/04
1585H Regents of the University of California
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
286201/15/04
1592H Regents of the University of California
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
286901/28/04
1570M County of San Joaquin
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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. Charging party’s factual allegations must be accepted as true during the investigation. more or view all topics or full text.
283712/19/03
1489E Golden Plains Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
It is not the function of the Board agent to judge the merits of the charging party’s dispute. Disputed facts or conflicting theories of law should be resolved in other proceedings after a complaint has been issued. Issues key to deciding the matter should be left to the Board’s hearing process. more or view all topics or full text.
263309807/08/02
1358E Los Angeles County Education Association, CTA/NEA (Burton)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where charging party fails to allege that any specific section of the Government Code has been violated a 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.
243100210/27/99
1360E Los Angeles County Office of Education (Burton)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Where charging party fails to allege that any specific section of the Government Code has been violated a 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.
243101611/03/99
1377E Los Angeles Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
243106202/28/00
A267S State of California (Department of Personnel Administration) (Fox)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Late filing (one day) will not be excused because good cause is not demonstrated by failure of Board agent to serve dismissal on person "assisting" charging party. Person had not filed a written notice of appearance with Board agent. more or view all topics or full text.
192606103/21/95
A208E Washington Teachers Association (McFarland)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Board agent does not need specific authority to follow the Board's direction to place a case in abeyance; Board agent has discretionary authority to determine whether to proceed with the investigation. more or view all topics or full text.
142111106/04/90
A081E Dry Creek Joint Elementary School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
In repugnancy review of arbitrator's ruling, general counsel instructed to conduct investigation and hearing into party's claim of repugnancy and to submit his record, findings, and recommendation to the Board itself; Board will issue final decision and order after completion of these proceedings; pp. 2-3. Board has jurisdiction to reactivate unfair practice proceedings which had been held in abeyance pending completion of binding arbitration proceedings; purpose of reactivation is to determine through investigation by general counsel whether the arbitrator's award is repugnant to the purposes of the EERA; p. 1. more or view all topics or full text.
41103603/06/80
1191E Bakersfield City School District (Guerra)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Vague statement which fails to allege specific facts underlying unfair practice charge does not comply with requirements of PERB Regulation 32615; p. 6, warning letter. more or view all topics or full text.
212807104/03/97
1178E Santa Clarita Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
212801812/04/96
0898E California School Employees Association (Lohmann)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
A regional attorney is not entitled to rule on the merits of a charge by resolving conflicting claims; p. 3. more or view all topics or full text.
152213808/30/91
0843E Temple City Unified School District * * * OVERRULED IN PART by Charter Oak Unified School District (1991) PERB Order No. 873-E
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Board agents not empowered to rule on the ultimate merits of the charge, nor resolve disputed facts. more or view all topics or full text.
142119109/28/90
0654H Regents of the University of California
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
General counsel does not exceed its authority or compel the Charging Party to "prove its case on paper" by requesting information, during investigation, for the purposes of screening the charge to determine if prima facie case exists. more or view all topics or full text.
121902412/31/87
0643S California Union of Safety Employees (Eckstein)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
A regional attorney determination, that expenditures by affiliates who received a portion of Charging Party's fair share fee were necessarily chargeable to him, is a factual finding, appropriately made only after an evidentiary hearing, not during investigation of charge. more or view all topics or full text.
121900912/18/87
2485E Petaluma City Elementary School District/Joint Union High School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
412306/30/16
1755H Trustees of the California State University (Sonoma)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
299703/01/05
0473E Los Angeles Unified School District (Wightman)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Regional attorney appropriately dismissed charge where charging party failed to amend charge to include facts to substantiate major allegation; p. 8. more or view all topics or full text.
91604412/31/84
0466E Eastside Union School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
91603712/19/84
0433E Saddleback Community College District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Regional attorney not entitled to judge the merits or to resolve disputed facts regarding contract interpretation. more or view all topics or full text.
81522211/16/84
0416E Fontana Teachers Association (Alexander, et al.)
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Failure of charging party to deny factual conclusions outlined in warning letter from regional attorney is justification for dismissal of charge. more or view all topics or full text.
81519010/16/84
0994E Lake Tahoe Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
The Board agent did not fully satisfy the requirements of PERB Regulation 32620 and failed (1) to treat the charging party's allegations as true and (2) to leave the weighing of evidence to the administrative law judge following a full evidentiary hearing. more or view all topics or full text.
172408904/30/93
0936E Lindsay Unified School District
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
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.
162308305/22/92
0913E Monterey County Office of Education
1100.2000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE; Investigation of Charge
Under PERB Regulation 32620, a Board agent is specifically enpowered to use telephone conversations to facilitate communication and the exchange of information between the parties; p. 3. Board agent may not take as conclusive ex parte statements regarding allegations in an unfair practice charge. Except for this limitation, the Board agent has the authority to conduct an investigation to determine whether the unfair practice charge allegations state a prima facie case; p. 4. As respondent was informed of oral allegations of the charging party and was provided opportunity to respond, no prejudice occurred by Board agent's consideration of the oral allegations; pp. 3-4, fn. 5) more or view all topics or full text.
162300912/13/91