All notes for Subtopic 1103.01000 – In General
| Decision | Description | PERC Vol. | PERC Index | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2761M | County of San Joaquin 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Notice pleading principles do not impose severe requirements in providing a respondent general notice of the claims alleged, especially given that PERB “is not a court, but an administrative agency” and favors “hearing cases on their merits.” (City and County of San Francisco (2020) PERB Decision No. 2712-M, p. 22, fn. 7.) more or view all topics or full text. | 45 | 92 | 04/12/21 |
| 2761M | County of San Joaquin 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General In a case involving a post-strike furlough resulting from a replacement contract containing a minimum shift guarantee, the complaint alleged discrimination against union and employee rights, as well as an independent claim for interference with union’s rights, but only a derivative claim for violation of employee rights. more or view all topics or full text. | 45 | 92 | 04/12/21 |
| 2745M | County of Sacramento 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General A proposed decision must address the allegations included in the complaint or justify why those allegations need not be addressed. (p. 16.) more or view all topics or full text. | 45 | 39 | 09/18/20 |
| 2745M | County of Sacramento 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General A complaint alleging surface bargaining typically states that, by the totality of its conduct, including but not limited to the conduct described in the complaint, the respondent failed and refused to meet and confer in good faith. In contrast, a complaint alleging a unilateral change—a per se violation—typically states that the respondent changed policy without affording the exclusive representative prior notice or an opportunity to meet and confer over the change or its effects. (p. 12.) more or view all topics or full text. | 45 | 39 | 09/18/20 |
| 2745M | County of Sacramento 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General PERB uses a “per se” or “totality of conduct” test to determine whether a respondent violated its obligation to meet and confer in good faith. Although the same conduct may give rise to violations under both per se and surface bargaining theories, they are necessarily different theories and must be alleged as separate unfair practices in the complaint. (pp. 11-12.) The omission of one theory does not foreclose its later consideration if the charging party: (1) moves to amend the complaint to add the independent allegation, or (2) satisfies the unalleged violation doctrine. (p. 13.) more or view all topics or full text. | 45 | 39 | 09/18/20 |
| 2514E | Santa Ana Unified School District 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General A Board agent may, either on a motion by the respondent or with notice and on the agency’s own motion, properly dismiss a complaint on a pre-hearing motion to dismiss where the motion establishes failure to prosecute or an affirmative defense as a matter of law based on undisputed facts. (pp. 19-20, 24-25.) However, in the absence of a hearing, a Board agent is not authorized to resolve factual disputes or make credibility determinations to dismiss an unfair practice case, whether the dismissal occurs during the pre-complaint investigation, or after a complaint has issued but before hearing. (PERB Reg. 32207.) Because in this case, the motion to dismiss asserting failure to prosecute and laches was based on disputed material facts, including the timing and significance of a medical condition suffered by a witness, the Board reversed the dismissal and remanded the matter for hearing within a reasonable time to adjudicate the complaint’s allegations. (pp. 2-3.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 132 | 02/08/17 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Conduct which is alleged in an unfair practice charge as evidence of bad-faith bargaining but not addressed in the pre-complaint investigation and not included in the complaint is proper for consideration at hearing because, under PERB Regulation 32620, the charging party must have notice in writing of any deficiencies in the charge before an allegation is dismissed. By restricting a charging party to only those indicia of bad faith specified in the complaint, where other indicia have been alleged in the charge but not included in the complaint, PERB would effectively dismiss charge allegations without notice of deficiencies to the charging party. PERB cannot change its Regulations through decisional law. (pp. 13-14.) more or view all topics or full text. | 41 | 97 | 11/30/16 |
| 2505M | City of Roseville 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 |
| 2475E | United Teachers of Los Angeles (Raines, et al) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Under relation back doctrine, PERB may include additional charging parties after the limitations period has run if their allegations are identical to those included in a previously-filed charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 40 | 147 | 02/29/16 |
| 2453E | Cabrillo Community College District 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 |
| 2380M | City of Selma 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General The concept of surface bargaining is reasonably contemplated within allegations of bad faith bargaining. more or view all topics or full text. | 39 | 11 | 06/27/14 |
| 2302H | Regents of the University of California 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General The admission of facts in a pleading “is a conclusive concession of the truth of a matter which has the effect of removing it from the issues.” Employer’s admission in answer of three alleged instances of protected activity is sufficient to establish that these three activities took place and that each constitute protected activity under HEERA. more or view all topics or full text. | 37 | 149 | 12/21/12 |
| 2288M | City of Pinole 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General 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 |
| 2072S | State of California (Department of Social Services) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Complaint alleging that placement of employee on administrative leave (ATO) as part of the process to reject him on probation can reasonably be construed to include the rejection on probation as part of the alleged adverse action. more or view all topics or full text. | 33 | 177 | 10/27/09 |
| 1822E | Santee Elementary School District 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Unnecessary to amend the complaint because initial complaint already covers the District’s failure to engage in effects bargaining. more or view all topics or full text. | 30 | 72 | 02/22/06 |
| 1566S | State of California (Department of Parks and Recreation) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Board finds that where conduct is arguably prohibited by the agreement between the parties, the board must defer to arbitration all multiple legal theories arising from that conduct. This ensures that there is one forum for resolution of a dispute, elimination of overlapping and duplicative proceedings, and promotion of more timely resolution of disputes that contribute to employer-employee stability. If a party fails to provide support for its contention that an arbitrator’s remedy can not resolve a derivate violation the board may dismiss that violation and also refer it to arbitration with along with the initial charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 31 | 12/16/03 |
| 1567S | State of California (Department of Mental Health) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Board finds that where conduct is arguably prohibited by the agreement between the parties, the board must defer to arbitration all multiple legal theories arising from that conduct. This ensures that there is one forum for resolution of a dispute, elimination of overlapping and duplicative proceedings, and promotion of more timely resolution of disputes that contribute to employer-employee stability. If a party fails to provide support for its contention that an arbitrator’s remedy can not resolve a derivate violation the board may dismiss that violation and also refer it to arbitration with along with the initial charge. more or view all topics or full text. | 28 | 32 | 12/16/03 |
| 1518E | Compton Unified School District 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Allegation in complaint that employer instructed employee to warn new teachers not to be influenced by union placed employer on notice that agency was at issue in the case. Even if employer was not placed on notice by the complaint, the agency issue could be addressed as an unalleged violation since the issue was addressed at hearing, both parties presented evidence on the issue and cross-examined witnesses, and both parties thoroughly briefed the issue establish that the issue. more or view all topics or full text. | 27 | 56 | 04/18/03 |
| 1326E | Chino Valley Unified School District 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General The Board reversed the dismissal and found that the Union had stated a prima facie case of a violation of EERA section 3543.5(c) and directed that a complaint be issued in this case; p. 7. more or view all topics or full text. | 23 | 30097 | 04/14/99 |
| 0716H | Regents of the University of California (Waters) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Board found that dismissal of the complaint was proper and that Statement of Reasons for Dismissal adequately set forth the grounds for the dismissal. more or view all topics or full text. | 13 | 20028 | 12/30/88 |
| 0238E | Grant Joint Union High School District (Seward, et al.) 1103.01000: CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; COMPLAINT; In General Charging Party's lack of specificity in charge, despite opportunity to amend, justified hearing officer's refusal to issue a complaint. more or view all topics or full text. | 6 | 13220 | 09/29/82 |