Decision 1428H – Regents of the University of California

LA-CE-569-H

Decision Date: April 19, 2001

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 25
Perc Index: 32059

Decision Headnotes

407.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; INTERFERENCE WITH DECERTIFICATION OR RIVAL UNION PETITION
407.04000 – Employer Favoritism/Absence of Strict Neutrality

Employer not obligated to advise exclusive representatives that employees have been granted access to webpage space even where employees are using it to oppose agency fee.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case

A charging party should allege the "who, what, when, where, and how" of an unfair practice. The assertion that UC violated its own internet/e-mail policies, or allowed use of other University services without more specificity, did not demonstrate that UC had violated the required neutrality of HEERA; p. 2-3, dismissal letter. Charging party provided no facts to support its contention that NoFee4Me was a competing employee organization within the definition of employee organization found in HEERA nor that the employer was treating them with any preference . Therefore, it failed to demonstrate that the University interfered with the internal activities of the employee organization; p. 3, dismissal letter.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.08000 – Pleading Requirements

Failure to provide specific facts regarding certain allegations is fatal to those allegations; p. 2, fn. 2.