Decision 1553S – California State Employees Association, Service Employees International Union Local 1000, AFL-CIO, Central Labor Councils (Sutton)
LA-CO-105-S
Decision Date: October 21, 2003
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Charge alleged the union violated duty of fair representation. Board found charge untimely.
Disposition: Board dismissed charge.
Perc Vol: 28
Perc Index: 8
Decision Headnotes
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
Statute of limitations for a charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation is six months and is triggered on the date the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party’s repeated requests for representation, in the face of steadfast refusals from the union, do not begin the limitations period anew.
1101.01000 – In General
Statute of limitations for a charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation is six months and is triggered on the date the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party’s repeated requests for representation, in the face of steadfast refusals from the union, do not begin the limitations period anew.
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
Statute of limitations for a charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation is six months and is triggered on the date the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party’s repeated requests for representation, in the face of steadfast refusals from the union, do not begin the limitations period anew.
1101.04000 – Continuing Violation
Statute of limitations for a charge alleging breach of the duty of fair representation is six months and is triggered on the date the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Charging party’s repeated requests for representation, in the face of steadfast refusals from the union, do not begin the limitations period anew.