Decision 1520E – Contra Costa Community College District

SF-CE-2292-E

Decision Date: May 8, 2003

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 27
Perc Index: 69

Decision Headnotes

300.00000 – UNFAIR PRACTICE ISSUES; PROTECTED ACTIVITIES
300.17000 – Other

Employee’s statement that he was not unsympathetic to faculty members organizing a no confidence vote is a statement of support of faculty members protesting management practices on matters within scope and therefore protected activity.


504.14000 – Other/In General

PERB has long recognized that direct evidence of discriminatory intent – the proverbial “smoking gun” – is rarely possible. Accordingly, the Board has held that circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent may be sufficient to establish the required nexus.

300.00000 – UNFAIR PRACTICE ISSUES; PROTECTED ACTIVITIES
300.15000 – Speech

Employee’s statement that he was not unsympathetic to faculty members organizing a no confidence vote is a statement of support of faculty members protesting management practices on matters within scope and therefore protected activity.

504.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; EVIDENCE OF UNLAWFUL MOTIVATION; NEXUS
504.12000 – Employer Statements or Conduct; Threats

It is axiomatic that the purpose of the employment interview is to elicit information from a candidate in order to make a hiring decision. The Board holds that when an employer asks an interviewee whether he or she is sympathetic to other employees exercising their rights under EERA, it creates a strong inference of discrimination and may constitute direct evidence of discrimination, thus, the requirement of nexus is satisfied for purposes of establishing a prima facie case.