Decision 1585H – Regents of the University of California
LA-CE-748-H
Decision Date: January 15, 2004
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Charge alleged that university discriminated against charging party because of protected activities. Board found charge to be timely, but held that no prima facie case was established.
Disposition: Board dismissed charge.
Perc Vol: 28
Perc Index: 62
Decision Headnotes
504.06000 – Meritorious or Satisfactory Work Record; Prior Promotion or Wage Increase
Fact that charges in the termination notice are unsubstantiated does not by itself establish the required nexus.
504.07000 – No reason or Inconsistent Reasons Given; Shifting Justifications
Fact that charges in the termination notice are unsubstantiated does not by itself establish the required nexus.
504.14000 – Other/In General
Fact that charges in the termination notice are unsubstantiated does not by itself establish the required nexus.
1100.01000 – In General/Prima Facie Case
Charging party must provide a clear and concise statement of facts; submitting a charge with 300 pages of attachments does not meet this standard. In the warning letter, Board agent should advise charging party of deficiencies, however, burden is still upon charging party to provide clear and concise statement of facts.
1100.02000 – Investigation of Charge
Charging party must provide a clear and concise statement of facts; submitting a charge with 300 pages of attachments does not meet this standard. In the warning letter, Board agent should advise charging party of deficiencies, however, burden is still upon charging party to provide clear and concise statement of facts.
1101.01000 – In General
Board adopts rule set forth in Romano v. Rockwell (1996) 14 Cal.4th 479, that where discrimination is alleged under HEERA, statute of limitations is triggered by effective date of termination, not the notice of termination; Regents of the University of California (1999) PERB Decision No. 1327-H is overruled.
1101.02000 – Amended Charge or Complaint; Withdrawal of Charge; Relation Back Doctrine
Board adopts rule set forth in Romano v. Rockwell (1996) 14 Cal.4th 479, that where discrimination is alleged under HEERA, statute of limitations is triggered by effective date of termination, not the notice of termination; Regents of the University of California (1999) PERB Decision No. 1327-H is overruled.
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
Board adopts rule set forth in Romano v. Rockwell (1996) 14 Cal.4th 479, that where discrimination is alleged under HEERA, statute of limitations is triggered by effective date of termination, not the notice of termination; Regents of the University of California (1999) PERB Decision No. 1327-H is overruled.
1101.04000 – Continuing Violation
Board adopts rule set forth in Romano v. Rockwell (1996) 14 Cal.4th 479, that where discrimination is alleged under HEERA, statute of limitations is triggered by effective date of termination, not the notice of termination; Regents of the University of California (1999) PERB Decision No. 1327-H is overruled.