Decision 1531M – City of Folsom

SA-CE-33-M

Decision Date: June 20, 2003

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 27
Perc Index: 89

Decision Headnotes

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.03000 – Standing

A violation of MMBA section 3505 by the City for refusing a request by the union representative to schedule a meeting to resolve the dispute and refusing a request by the union representative to submit the dispute to an arbitrator is only actionable by the union.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.01000 – In General

Because the employee resigned (per the agreement) knowing that the City had not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement, the employee was aware on the date of resignation of the alleged infraction as of that date and the limitations period started to run. Subsequent failures by the City to honor the employee’s multiple requests to cure its violation do not restart the limitations period.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period

Because the employee resigned (per the agreement) knowing that the City had not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement, the employee was aware on the date of resignation of the alleged infraction as of that date and the limitations period started to run. Subsequent failures by the City to honor the employee’s multiple requests to cure its violation do not restart the limitations period.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.04000 – Continuing Violation

Because the employee resigned (per the agreement) knowing that the City had not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement, the employee was aware on the date of resignation of the alleged infraction as of that date and the limitations period started to run. Subsequent failures by the City to honor the employee’s multiple requests to cure its violation do not restart the limitations period.