Decision 2129E – Sacramento City Unified School District
SA-CE-2507-E
Decision Date: September 3, 2010
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The charge alleged that the District removed a substitute teacher’s name from its list of active substitutes because the teacher prevailed on several grievances.
Disposition: The Board reversed the Board agent’s dismissal of the charge and remanded for a complaint. The Board held that the charge stated a prima facie case of retaliation because the District removed the substitute teacher from the active list five weeks after grievances were resolved in his favor, the District administrator who handled grievances also controlled the active list, and the District exaggerated the facts surrounding the incident cited to justify removal.
Perc Vol: 34
Perc Index: 134
Decision Headnotes
300.05000 – Grievances
Filing a grievance and pursuing it to final resolution are protected activities.
501.01000 – In General; Elements of Prima Facie Case
Prima facie case established when charge alleged that school district removed substitute teacher from active substitute list five weeks after several grievances were settled in his favor; the district administrator who handled the grievances also controlled the substitute list; and the district exaggerated the incident cited as the reason for his removal from the list.
503.01000 – In General
Removal of substitute teacher’s name from the school district’s active substitute list was an adverse action because it effectively terminated the teacher’s employment with the district.
503.07000 – Discharge; Layoffs; Constructive Discharge; Rejection During Probation
Removal of substitute teacher’s name from the school district’s active substitute list was an adverse action because it effectively terminated the teacher’s employment with the district.
503.15000 – Other
Removal of substitute teacher’s name from the school district’s active substitute list was an adverse action because it effectively terminated the teacher’s employment with the district.
504.02000 – Disparate Treatment
Disparate treatment of substitute teacher not established when charge contained no factual allegations regarding the school district’s treatment of any other substitute teacher who had been late to an assignment.
504.04000 – Timing of Action
Timing factor established when school district removed substitute teacher’s name from its active substitute list five weeks after several grievances were resolved in the teacher’s favor.
504.07000 – No reason or Inconsistent Reasons Given; Shifting Justifications
School district’s failure to give substitute teacher a reason for removing him from the district’s active substitute list did not support an inference of unlawful motive where the district was not required by law or policy to give a reason and the district had no past practice of doing so. No shifting justifications when employer did not give a reason at time of adverse action and then gave one in response to unfair practice charge.
504.14000 – Other/In General
School district’s exaggeration of the facts surrounding a substitute teacher’s late arrival for an assignment indicates that the incident was a pretext for removing the teacher’s name from the active substitute list because of his protected activity.
505.01000 – In General
At the charge investigation stage, PERB may not consider the employer’s affirmative defense that it would have taken adverse action against the employee even if the employee had not engaged in protected activity.
1100.02000 – Investigation of Charge
To determine whether a charge alleges a prima facie case, the Board agent must assume that the essential facts alleged in the charge are true. If the Board agent’s investigation reveals conflicting issues of material fact, the conflict must be resolved via PERB’s hearing process; the Board agent may not resolve the conflict at the investigation stage.