Decision 1418E – Peralta Community College District
SF-CE-2145
Decision Date: February 26, 2001
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The Board dismissed the unfair practice charge. The charge alleged that the employer violated EERA by failing to adhere to the parties’ grievance arbitration procedures.
Disposition: Dismissed. The charging party failed to establish the charge was timely filed. No good cause existed to consider new supporting evidence on appeal to the Board.
Perc Vol: 25
Perc Index: 32037
Decision Headnotes
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case
Allegation that District failed to follow proper performance evaluation procedures without an indication that the alleged adverse action occurred close in time to any protected activities does not establish a prima facie violation of EERA.
504.04000 – Timing of Action
Allegation that District failed to follow proper performance evaluation procedures without an indication that the alleged adverse action occurred close in time to any protected activities does not establish a prima facie violation of EERA.
1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case
Failure of Charging Party to keep PERB informed of her current address and to communicate with PERB in an effective and timely manner does not constitute good cause under regulation 32635(b) for PERB to consider new supporting evidence offered for the first time on appeal to the Board.
1101.01000 – In General
Charging Party failed to meet burden of establishing that charge was timely filed when charge did not provide any dates when challenged events occurred.
1105.19000 – Newly Discovered Evidence
Failure of Charging Party to keep PERB informed of her current address and to communicate with PERB in an effective and timely manner does not constitute good cause under regulation 32635(b) for PERB to consider new supporting evidence offered for the first time on appeal to the Board.
1107.01000 – Exceptions; Responses to Exceptions; Standing; Extensions of Time/Late Filing/Waiver
Failure of Charging Party to keep PERB informed of her current address and to communicate with PERB in an effective and timely manner does not constitute good cause under regulation 32635(b) for PERB to consider new supporting evidence offered for the first time on appeal to the Board.