Decision 1185E – Healdsburg Union High School District
SF-CE-1774, 1818
Decision Date: February 24, 1997
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Union appealed dismissal of its charge that District retaliated against employee for his exercise of protected rights.
Disposition: Dismissed. Union failed to demonstrate that District’s actions were unlawfully motivated.
Perc Vol: 21
Perc Index: 28055
Decision Headnotes
300.01000 – In General
Filing grievances and serving on union negotiating team are protected activities; p. 47, proposed dec.
300.05000 – Grievances
Filing grievances and serving on union negotiating team are protected activities; p. 47, proposed dec.
300.06000 – Demands for Change in Working Conditions
Filing grievances and serving on union negotiating team are protected activities; p. 47, proposed dec.
300.09000 – Participation in Board Process
Filing of grievances and unfair practices is protected activity; p. 47, proposed dec.
300.13000 – Holding Union Office
Filing grievances and serving on union negotiating team are protected activities; p. 47, proposed dec.
504.14000 – Other/In General
Animus of administrators can be imputed to school Board where information relied on by Board came from administrators and Board, like administrators misidentified documents; p. 52, proposed dec.
505.03000 – Misconduct
Insubordination may be met with discipline, notwithstanding protected activitiy.
1405.02000 – Type or Nature of Prior Proceeding
Where District both presided over the disciplinary hearing and acted as a party to the action, disciplinary hearing lacked judicial character and the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply; p. 51, proposed dec.
1400.02000 – Employer Responsibility
Animus of administrators can be imputed to school Board where information relied on by Board came from administrators and Board, like administrators misidentified documents; p. 52, proposed dec.
104.03000 – Conclusiveness of Prior Determination by Federal Agencies, Other State Agencies or Courts
Where District both presided over the discipliniary hearing and acted as a party to the action, disciplinary hearing lacked judicial character and the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not apply; p. 51, proposed dec.
201.02000 – Agents (See also 1400)
Animus of administrators can be imputed to school Board where information relied on by Board came from administrators and Board, like administrators misidentified documents; p. 52, proposed dec.