Decision 1572E – Fremont Unified District Teachers Association (Kaiser)
SF-CO-606-E
Decision Date: December 24, 2003
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Charge alleged that union violated duty of fair representation. Board affirmed dismissal.
Dismissal: Board dismissed charge.
Perc Vol: 28
Perc Index: 39
Decision Headnotes
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
The duty of fair representation imposed on the exclusive representative extends to grievance handling. In this case, the allegation is that the union failed to secure charging party an expedited grievance meeting. The Board has held that a union’s case-handling error (e.g., missing the deadline for filing a grievance) only constitutes negligence and does not rise to the level of arbitrary conduct sufficient to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The courts have recognized an exception to this rule where the union’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant. Here, however, there is no allegation that grievance was foreclosed or adversely affected. While union’s alleged handling of grievance may constitute negligence, there is otherwise no allegation of bad faith, discriminatory, or arbitrary conduct. Accordingly, charge must be dismissed for failure to state a prima facie case.
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration
The duty of fair representation imposed on the exclusive representative extends to grievance handling. In this case, the allegation is that the union failed to secure charging party an expedited grievance meeting. The Board has held that a union’s case-handling error (e.g., missing the deadline for filing a grievance) only constitutes negligence and does not rise to the level of arbitrary conduct sufficient to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation. The courts have recognized an exception to this rule where the union’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant. Here, however, there is no allegation that grievance was foreclosed or adversely affected. While union’s alleged handling of grievance may constitute negligence, there is otherwise no allegation of bad faith, discriminatory, or arbitrary conduct. Accordingly, charge must be dismissed for failure to state a prima facie case.
1101.01000 – In General
In a claim for breach of the duty of fair representation, the statute of limitations is triggered “on the date when the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely.” In this matter, charging party alleges that the union breached its duty of fair representation by failing to secure her an expedited grievance meeting. The Board finds that charging party knew, or should have known, that further assistance was unlikely on the date that charging party wrote the District requesting such a meeting.
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
In a claim for breach of the duty of fair representation, the statute of limitations is triggered “on the date when the employee, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely.” In this matter, charging party alleges that the union breached its duty of fair representation by failing to secure her an expedited grievance meeting. The Board finds that charging party knew, or should have known, that further assistance was unlikely on the date that charging party wrote the District requesting such a meeting.