Decision 2061E – Oakland Unified School District
SF-CE-2636-E
Decision Date: September 10, 2009
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The charging party alleged that the district unlawfully terminated her employment because she consulted with the union.
Disposition: The Board dismissed the charge finding that the district would have terminated charging party’s employment notwithstanding her protected activity because she stopped reporting for work.
Perc Vol: 33
Perc Index: 153
Decision Headnotes
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case
Supervisor who initiated termination by informing personnel officer of employee's absence, did not know of employee's protected activity. However, the personnel officer who signed and issued the termination notice knew of the protected activity. As the personnel officer was a participant in the decision to issue the disciplinary action, the "knowledge" element is established.
501.02000 – Burden of Proof; Evidence
Charging party bears the burden at the formal hearing of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the elements of a prima facie case of discrimination.
504.03000 – Departure from Past Practices or Procedures
The district departed from established procedures by failing to notify the employee of the date of the job abandonment hearing.
505.03000 – Misconduct
The district would have terminated the employee's employment even in the absence of protected activity because she stopped coming to work.
501.03000 – Knowledge of Protected Activity
Supervisor who initiated termination by informing personnel officer of employee's absence, did not know of employee's protected activity. However, the personnel officer who signed and issued the termination notice knew of the protected activity. As the personnel officer was a participant in the decision to issue the disciplinary action, the "knowledge" element is established.
1100.02000 – Investigation of Charge
The PERB General Counsel's Office will issue a complaint if the charging party has alleged facts that, if proven true in a subsequent hearing, would state a prima facie violation of EERA.
1100.08000 – Pleading Requirements
The PERB General Counsel's Office will issue a complaint if the charging party has alleged facts that, if proven true in a subsequent hearing, would state a prima facie violation of EERA.
1103.02000 – Issuance of Complaint
The PERB General Counsel's Office will issue a complaint if the charging party has alleged facts that, if proven true in a subsequent hearing, would state a prima facie violation of EERA.
1104.04000 – Substitution of ALJ
The case was reassigned to a new ALJ after the ALJ who conducted the hearing retired. Neither party objected to the reassignment.
1105.03000 – Burden of Proof; Weight of Evidence; Presumptions and Inferences; Affirmative Defenses
Charging party bears the burden at the formal hearing of proving by a preponderance of the evidence the elements of a prima facie case of discrimination.