Decision 1325E – Los Angeles Community College District
LA-CE-4006
Decision Date: April 13, 1999
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Employee appealed Board agent’s dismissal of his unfair practice charge against the District for violation of EERA when it terminated his employment in retaliation for his protected activities.
Disposition: Dismissed. Facts did not support allegation that employer’s action was based on employee’s protected conduct.
Perc Vol: 23
Perc Index: 30096
Decision Headnotes
501.02000 – Burden of Proof; Evidence
Charge must allege facts from which Board agent may infer improper motive for District's actions - mere assertions are insufficient; p. 3, warning letter. Allegations that a newspaper article and a failure to follow proper evaluation procedures supported a finding of nexus are not credit because facts do not support the allegations.
504.04000 – Timing of Action
Lapse of several years between protected activity and adverse action does not support a finding of nexus between activity and adverse action; p. 3, warning letter.
1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case
Allegations that a newpaper article and a failure to follow proper evaluation procedures supported a finding of nexus are not credit because facts do not support the allegations.
1100.08000 – Pleading Requirements
Charge must allege facts from which Board agent may infer improper motive for District's actions - mere assertions are insufficient; p. 3, warning letter. Allegations that a newspaper article and a failure to follow proper evaluation procedures supported a finding of nexus are not credit because facts do not support the allegations.
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case
Charge must allege facts from which Board agent may infer improper motive for District's actions - mere assertions are insufficient; p. 3, warning letter.