Decision 1274E – Los Rios Community College District (Deglow)
SA-CE-1778
Decision Date: July 20, 1998
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Employee appealed dismissal of her unfair practice charge alleging the District interfered with EERA rights when it agreed to contract language limiting individual grievant’ s right to representation at grievance meetings.
Disposition: Dismissed. Employee failed to establish prima facie case.
Perc Vol: 22
Perc Index: 29124
Decision Headnotes
300.04000 – Individual/Concerted/Activities/Self-Representation
In order to establish a prima facie case of unlawful interference, the charging party must establish that the respondent's conduct tends to or does result in some harm to employee rights granted under EERA. The statutory right of self-representation falls short of the right to resort to the arbitration process. Under the statute and Board precedent, this contractual limitation does not violate charging party's section 3543 rights, and this allegation must be dismissed.
300.05000 – Grievances
In order to establish a prima facie case of unlawful interference, the charging party must establish that the respondent's conduct tends to or does result in some harm to employee rights granted under EERA. The stututory right of self-representation falls short of the right to resort to the arbitration process. Under the statute and Board precedent, this contractual limitation does not violate charging party's section 3543 rights, and this allegation must be dismissed.
408.01000 – In General
In order to establish a prima facie case of unlawful interference, the charging party must establish that the respondent's conduct tends to or does result in some harm to employee rights granted under EERA. The statutory right of self-representation falls short of the right to resort to the arbitration process. Under the statute and Board precedent, this contractual limitation does not violate charging party's section 3543 rights, and this allegation must be dismissed. District's agreement to contract language which denies employees the right to have a representative of the employee's choice in grievance meetings fails to state a prima facie violation; pursuant to Chaffey, No. 202 and despite Valley of the Moon, No. 1165.
408.02000 – Grievances/Grievance Procedure
In order to establish a prima facie case of unlawful interference, the charging party must establish that the respondent's conduct tends to or does result in some harm to employee rights granted under EERA. The statutory right of self-representation falls short of the right to resort to the arbitration process. Under the statute and Board precedent, this contractual limitation does not violate charging party's section 3543 rights, and this allegation must be dismissed.
503.15000 – Other
No adverse action where employer agreed with union to modify contract but both before and after modification employees could present grievances to the District either alone or with the assistance of a union representative. Requesting that charging party be forced to pay sanctions is not an adverse act; pp. 1-2, dismissal letter.
1205.04000 – Attorneys Fees and Costs
The charging party had not engaged in the kind of "repeated presentation of charges" which are "virtually identical in content" to issues previously raised by her before the Board. Thus, the charging party has not engaged in conduct which is "without arguable merit, frivolous, vexatious, dilatory, pursued in bad faith or otherwise an abuse of process." The request for sanctions in this case is denied.