Decision 1564E – Long Beach Community College District

Board found EERA section 3541.5(a) essentially codifies the policy developed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Therefore, it is appropriate to look to the private sector and the NLRB for guidance in interpreting this statute.

Board cannot acquire jurisdiction by the parties’ consent agreement, stipulation or acquiescence, by waiver or estoppel, nor by the established practices, customs, or Board regulation.

Board overruled California State University, San Diego (1989) PERB Decision No. 718-H, which found that statute of limitation under EERA was mandatory. Board held that it was not mandatory, but rather an affirmative defense that must be raised or is waived.

Board held that statute of limitation under EERA is not jurisdictional; overruling California State University, San Diego (1989) PERB Decision No. 718-H. Instead the statute of limitation must be raised as an affirmative defense or it is waived. Board reinstated doctrine of equitable tolling. Board held that when a grievance has been filed utilizing a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure in an effort to resolve the same dispute which is the subject of the charge, the statute of limitations is tolled during the period of time the grievance is being pursued if: (1) the charging party reasonably and in good faith pursues the grievance; and (2) tolling did not frustrate the purpose of the statutory limitation period by causing surprise or prejudice to the respondent.

Board reinstated doctrine of equitable tolling. Board held that when a grievance has been filed utilizing a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure in an effort to resolve the same dispute which is the subject of the charge, the statute of limitations is tolled during the period of time the grievance is being pursued if: (1) the charging party reasonably and in good faith pursues the grievance; and (2) tolling did not frustrate the purpose of the statutory limitation period by causing surprise or prejudice to the respondent.

Board reinstated doctrine of equitable tolling. Board held that when a grievance has been filed utilizing a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure in an effort to resolve the same dispute which is the subject of the charge, the statute of limitations is tolled during the period of time the grievance is being pursued if: (1) the charging party reasonably and in good faith pursues the grievance; and (2) tolling did not frustrate the purpose of the statutory limitation period by causing surprise or prejudice to the respondent. Section 3541.5(a) only addresses grievance machinery that ends in binding arbitration. Board believes that parties to a negotiated grievance procedure, even one that does not end in binding arbitration, should be encouraged to utilize the procedure to settle disputes at the most informal level.

Board held that statute of limitation under EERA is not jurisdictional; overruling California State University, San Diego (1989) PERB Decision No. 718-H. Instead the statute of limitation must be raised as an affirmative defense or it is waived.

Board believes that parties to a negotiated grievance procedure, even one that does not end in binding arbitration, should be encouraged to utilize the procedure to settle disputes at the most informal level.