Decision 2035M – Solano County Fair Association
SF-CE-454-M
Decision Date: June 9, 2009
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The Charging Party alleged that the fair association terminated him in retaliation for engaging in protected activity.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the Board agent’s dismissal of the unfair practice charge because it was untimely filed. While finding that the doctrine of equitable tolling as set forth in Long Beach Community College District (2009) PERB Decision No. 2002 applies to cases filed under the MMBA, the requirements for equitable tolling were not met, where the Charging Party failed to allege facts showing that his grievance was being pursued under a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure, and instead alleged that the parties had no such procedure.
Perc Vol: 33
Perc Index: 102
Decision Headnotes
503.07000 – Discharge; Layoffs; Constructive Discharge; Rejection During Probation
In a charge alleging wrongful termination based on retaliation for protected activity under the MMBA, the six month statute of limitations period does not begin to run until the date of actual termination.
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
In a charge alleging wrongful termination based on retaliation for protected activity under the MMBA, the six month statute of limitations period does not begin to run until the date of actual termination.
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling
The doctrine of equitable tolling as set forth in Long Beach Community College District (2009) PERB Decision No. 2002 applies to cases filed under the MMBA. Pursuant to Long Beach, the six-month limitation period for filing a charge with PERB should only be extended equitably when a party utilizes a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure. Equitable tolling did not apply to extend the limitations period for filing an unfair practice charge with PERB under the MMBA where charging party failed to allege facts showing that his grievance was being pursued under a bilaterally agreed upon dispute resolution procedure, and instead alleged that the parties had no such dispute resolution procedure.
1109.01000 – In General
PERB Regulation 32635(b) prohibits a party from presenting new supporting evidence in an appeal before PERB, unless good cause is shown.
1503.02000 – Regulations Considered (By Number)
PERB Regulation 32635(b) prohibits a party from presenting new supporting evidence in an appeal before PERB, unless good cause is shown.