1. Home
  2. Decisions
  3. Decision A514E - Dailey Elementary Charter School

Decision 0920S – State of California (Office of Lieutenant Governor)

S-CE-527-S

Decision Date: January 14, 1992

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 16
Perc Index: 23027

Decision Headnotes

201.00000 – PARTIES; DEFINITIONS; WHO IS AN EMPLOYER?
201.01000 – In General

Board affirmed dismissal of charge that Lt. Gov. violated section 3519(d) of Dills on grounds that Lt. Gov. is not an employer under the Dills Act, where no facts demonstrating Lt. Gov. was acting as, or on behalf of the Governor.

201.00000 – PARTIES; DEFINITIONS; WHO IS AN EMPLOYER?
201.02000 – Agents (See also 1400)

Board affirmed dismissal of charge that Lt. Gov. violated section 3519(d) of Dills on grounds that Lt. Gov. is not an employer under the Dills Act, where no facts demonstrating Lt. Gov. acted as an agent of the Governor.

401.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION, EMPLOYER CONDUCT AFFECTING ORGANIZING, UNION ACCESS; SOLICITATION, AND OTHER UNION RIGHTS
401.02000 – Discrimination Favoring Organization Over Another

Board affirms dismissal of charge that Lt. Gov.'s office violated section 3519(d) of Dills Act when Lt. Gov. sent congratulatory letter to organizer of decertification effort against charging party, on grounds the Lt. Gov. not an employer under Dills.

407.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION
407.04000 – Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality

Board affirms dismissal of charge that Lt. Gov.'s office violated section 3519(d) of Dills Act when Lt. Gov. sent congratulatory letter to organizer of decertification effort against charging party, on grounds the Lt. Gov. not an employer under Dills.

1205.00000 – REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; MISCELLANEOUS REMEDIAL PROVISIONS
1205.04000 – Attorneys Fees and Costs

Board denies DPA's request for attorneys' fees in defending dismissal of charge because, although Board affirmed dismissal, the Board finds there is insufficient grounds to award attorneys' fees where the State failed to allege the case was frivolous, vexatious, dilatory, pursued in bad faith, or otherwise an abuse of process.