Decision 2051M – Service Employees International Union Local 721 (Hagens and Toole)

LA-CO-71-M

Decision Date: July 20, 2009

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 33
Perc Index: 132

Decision Headnotes

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case

In a charge alleging violation of the duty of fair representation and bad faith negotiation under the MMBA, the limitations period begins to run once the charging party knows, or should have known, of the conduct underlying the charge. Charge failed to contain any allegations of unlawful activity within six months prior to filing the charge and was therefore untimely.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period

In a charge alleging violation of the duty of fair representation and bad faith negotiation under the MMBA, charge failed to contain any allegations of unlawful activity within six months prior to filing the charge.

1109.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; ISSUES ON APPEAL
1109.01000 – In General

PERB Regulation 32635(b) prohibits a party from presenting new allegations and new supporting evidence in an appeal before PERB, unless good cause is shown. Allegations and evidence presented for the first time on appeal predated the Board agent’s dismissal letter and therefore were known to charging parties, yet they did not present them to the Board agent in an amended charge. Therefore, good cause did not exist for Board to consider new allegations and supporting evidence.

1503.00000 – MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES; REGULATIONS
1503.02000 – Regulations Considered (By Number)

PERB Regulation 32635(b) prohibits a party from presenting new allegations and new supporting evidence in an appeal before PERB, unless good cause is shown. Allegations and evidence presented for the first time on appeal predated the Board agent’s dismissal letter and therefore were known to charging parties, yet they did not present them to the Board agent in an amended charge. Therefore, good cause did not exist for Board to consider new allegations and supporting evidence.