Decision 0459S – State of California (Department of Transportation)

LA-CE-91-S

Decision Date: December 12, 1984

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 9
Perc Index: 16027

Decision Headnotes

504.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; EVIDENCE OF UNLAWFUL MOTIVATION; NEXUS
504.02000 – Disparate Treatment

The absence of retaliatory action against other union adherents does not disapprove a prima facie showing of retaliation against complainant. A discriminatory motive, otherwise established, is not disapproved by an employer's proof that it did not weed out all union adherents.

102.00000 – PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; SCOPE OF PERB JURISDICTION
102.02000 – Concurrent or Conflicting Jurisdiction with Other Agencies or Courts; Interpretation or Enforcement of Other Statutes

PERB not obligated to defer to SPB decision [where collateral estoppel not required]. SPB holding that discipline warranted does not preclude contrary PERB decision. Although SPB found employee engaged in proscribed conduct for which he disciplined, PERB in mixed motive case finds that employee would not have been disciplined but for his union activity.

104.00000 – PERB: OPERATION, JURISDICTION, AUTHORITY; STATUTORY AUTHORITY OF BOARD
104.03000 – Conclusiveness of Prior Determination by Federal Agencies, Other State Agencies or Courts

PERB not obligated to defer to SPB decision [where collateral estoppel not required]. SPB holding that discipline warranted does not preclude contrary PERB decision. Although SPB found employee engaged in proscribed conduct for which he disciplined, PERB in mixed motive case finds that employee would not have been disciplined but for his union activity.

1405.00000 – GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL; RES JUDICATA
1405.01000 – In General

PERB not obligated to defer to SPB decision [where collateral estoppel not required]. SPB holding that discipline warranted does not preclude contrary PERB decision. Although SPB found employee engaged in proscribed conduct for which he disciplined, PERB in mixed motive case finds that employee would not have been disciplined but for his union activity. (See also PERB Decision No. 805b-H, review denied.)