Decision 1323E – Ventura County Community College District

LA-CE-3829

Decision Date: April 8, 1999

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 23
Perc Index: 30094

Decision Headnotes

300.00000 – UNFAIR PRACTICE ISSUES; PROTECTED ACTIVITIES
300.05000 – Grievances

The filing and pursuit of grievances is an activity protected by the EERA; p. 10.

501.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DISCRIMINATION
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case

In order to state a prima facie case for retaliation, a charging party must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the employee engaged in activity protected by the EERA; (2) the employer knew of said acitivity; and (3) the employer took adverse action against the employee because of the activity. However, the absence of any element of the prima facie case requires the Board to dismiss the allegation; pp. 8-9.

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.01000 – In General

Where coworkers and supervisor had expressed fear of employee, employee had recently pled no-contest to spousal abuse charges, dean had observed employee's anger and frustration during meeting, Board found that employee's behavior, rather than protected activity, motivated college dean's decision to issue memorandum recommending evaluation of employee; pp.10-11.

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.02000 – Demand by Union or Fellow Employees; Intraunion and Rival Union Disputes

Where coworkers and supervisor had expressed fear of employee, employee had recently pled no-contest to spousal abuse charges, and college dean had observed employee's anger and frustration during meeting, Board found that employee's behavior, rather than protected activity, motivated college dean's decision to issue memorandum recommending psychiatric evaluation of employee; pp. 10-11.

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.03000 – Misconduct

Where coworkers and supervisor had expressed fear of employee, employee had recently pled no-contest to spousal abuse charges, and college dean had observed employee's anger and frustration during meeting, Board found that employee's behavior, rather than protected activity, motivated college dean's decision to issue memorandum recommending psychiatric evaluation of employee; pp. 10-11.

505.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DEFENSES
505.11000 – Legitimate Business Purpose/Business Necessity

Where coworkers and supervisor had expressed fear of employee, employee had recently pled no-contest to spousal abuse charges, and college dean had observed employee's anger and frustration during meeting, Board found that employee's behavior, rather than protected activity, motivated college dean's decision to issue memorandum recommending psychiatric evalution of employee; pp. 10-11. Where college began investigation into employee's fitness for duty prior to employee's protected activity and relied on outside assessment of employee's potential for violence in ordering psychiatric evaluation, Board found that employee's protected activity did not motivate college's decision to place employee on administrative leave pending psychiatric evaluation; pp. 11-12.