Decision 1736S – California State Employees Association (Chen)
LA-CO-111-S
Decision Date: January 19, 2005
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Chen alleged CSEA breached the duty of fair representation.
Disposition: The Board dismissed the charge as untimely.
Perc Vol: 29
Perc Index: 56
Decision Headnotes
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
In a duty of fair representation case, the statute of limitations begins to run when the charging party knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. Chen should have known well before February 10, 6 months before the charge was filed, that CSEA was not pursuing her grievance. CSEA drafted the grievance on December 9. CSEA failed to respond to her December 12 letter inquiry and telephone messages the week of January 12. Therefore, the charge was untimely filed.
1101.01000 – In General
In a duty of fair representation case, the statute of limitations begins to run when the charging party knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. The charge was filed August 10, 2004. Chen should have known well before February 10, 6 months before the charge was filed, that CSEA was not pursuing her grievance. CSEA drafted the grievance on December 9. CSEA failed to respond to her December 12 letter inquiry and telephone messages the week of January 12. Therefore, the charge was untimely filed.
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
In a duty of fair representation case, the statute of limitations begins to run when the charging party knew or should have known that further assistance from the union was unlikely. The charge was filed August 10, 2004. Chen should have known well before February 10, 6 months before the charge was filed, that CSEA was not pursuing her grievance. CSEA drafted the grievance on December 9. CSEA failed to respond to her December 12 letter inquiry and telephone messages the week of January 12. Therefore, the charge was untimely filed.