Decision 1224S – State of California (Department of Corrections) (Martin)

LA-CE-345-S

Decision Date: October 31, 1997

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 22
Perc Index: 29004

Decision Headnotes

200.00000 – PARTIES; DEFINITIONS; WHO IS AN EMPLOYEE? (SEE 502 AND 1309)
200.07000 – Temporary, Part-Time or Substitute Employees

Article VII, section 1 of the California Constitution states that the civil service includes every employee of the state "except as otherwise provided in this Constitution" and Article VII, section 4 lists thirteen specific exemptions; charging party was a temporary employee, which was not one of the specific exemptions. Therefore, charging party was a "state employee" for purposes of the Dills Act; pp. 4-5. Dills Act rights extend to "any civil service employee of the State," and does not expressly exclude temporary employees; therefore, Martin was a state employee under the Dills Act and PERB has jurisdiction over the case; pp. 7-8.

503.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; ADVERSE ACTIONS
503.07000 – Discharge; Layoffs; Constructive Discharge; Rejection During Probation

Where employee was laid off after allegedly attending union meeting, but there was no evidence that employer knew of employee's having gone to meeting, there can be no prima facie showing of discrimination by employer in retaliation for exercise of protected conduct; pp. 13-14, proposed dec.