Decision 0845H – California State University, Fresno
Decision Date: October 4, 1990
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Perc Vol: 14
Perc Index: 21193
504.03000 – Departure from Past Practices or Procedures
Inaccurate preparation of probationary employee's evaluation reports was a departure from established procedures; p. 14. Discussion of employee's status on probation at management meetings was a departure from established procedures; p. 14.
504.04000 – Timing of Action
Proximity of time exists where rejection from probation occurred six days after employee testified at a PERB formal hearing; p. 12.
504.07000 – No reason or Inconsistent Reasons Given; Shifting Justifications
Inconsistent or contradictory explanations evident in employer's evaluation of probationary employees; p. 13.
504.08000 – Cursory Investigation
Inadequate investigation of probationary employee where investigation confined to last 30 days of employment and completed in a hurried nature; p. 14.
300.09000 – Participation in Board Process
Employee who testifies at a PERB formal hearing engages in protected activity; p. 10.
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case
Charging party must prove: (1) the employee engaged in protected activity; (2) the employer had knowledge of such protected activity; and (3) adverse action was taken against the employee as a result of such protected activity; pp. 9-10.
501.02000 – Burden of Proof; Evidence
Rejected from probation six days after testimony at a PERB formal hearing, inconsistencies in employer's actions, departure from established procedures, and inadequacies of the investigation of employee's performance support finding of a prima facie case of discrimination; p. 14. No operational justification where employer relied on prior employment history and failed to present credible evidence; pp. 15-16, 18.
503.07000 – Discharge; Layoffs; Constructive Discharge; Rejection During Probation
Employee's rejection from probation constitutes adverse action; p. 10.
505.11000 – Legitimate Business Purpose/Business Necessity
No operational necessity defense where there was inconsistent testimony and employer failed to meet the most minimum of standards in documenting employee's performance throughout probationary period; p. 18.
505.13000 – Other
Improper for ALJ and employer to rely on employee's employment history, known by employer prior to employment, as a basis for rejection during probation; p. 17.
1201.02000 – Reinstatement
Board reinstated probationary employee based on finding that employer unlawfully rejected employee from probation; p. 19.