Decision 2093H – Trustees of the California State University (San Marcos)

LA-CE-1038-H

Decision Date: February 2, 2010

Decision Type: PERB Decision

Description: Charging party alleged the employer interfered with his right to file grievances.

Disposition: The Board held the statute of limitations was equitably tolled, finding the charge timely filed.  The Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision, based on credibility findings, that charging party did not prove the employer interfered with protected rights.

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 34
Perc Index: 40

Decision Headnotes

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling

The Board extended the doctrine of equitable tolling to cases arising under HEERA in Trustees of the California State University (San Jose) (2009) PERB Decision No. 2032-H. The statute of limitations was equitably tolled as: (1) charging party’s grievance was filed pursuant to a negotiated written agreement; (2) the same incident was at issue in the grievance and the charge; (3) charging party pursued the grievance by attending grievance meetings; and (4) no evidence existed that tolling caused prejudiced.

1105.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; EVIDENCE
1105.03000 – Burden of Proof; Weight of Evidence; Presumptions and Inferences; Affirmative Defenses

Charging party’s witness testimony was contradicted by that of four other witnesses. Thus, charging party did not prove the complaint by a preponderance of the evidence.

1105.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; EVIDENCE
1105.14000 – Witnesses: Credibility, Cross Examination and Impeachment; Pretrial Statements

Charging party’s witness testimony was contradicted by that of four other witnesses. Thus, charging party did not prove the complaint by a preponderance of the evidence.

1107.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD
1107.02000 – Weight Given to ALJ’s Proposed Decision: Findings, Conclusions, Credibility Resolutions

The Board grants deference to ALJ credibility determinations absent evidence to support overturning such conclusions. The ALJ’s credibility determinations are proper and support the conclusion that charging party has not proven his case.