Decision 2151H – Trustees of the California State University

LA-CE-1007-H

Decision Date: December 14, 2010

Decision Type: PERB Decision

Description: Charging party alleged that the University made a misrepresentation of fact to a factfinding panel, and failed to provide requested information.

Disposition: The Board affirmed the Board agent’s dismissal finding that the information request allegation was not timely filed, and that the single allegation of misrepresentation is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of bad faith bargaining.

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 35
Perc Index: 14

Decision Headnotes

601.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH (FOR SPECIFIC SUBJECTS, SEE SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION, SEC 1000)
601.01000 – In General, Per Se and Totality of Conduct; Prima Facie Case

A party to a fact finding hearing does not violate EERA by failing to present all information that the other party wishes it would, or putting its own spin on the data. Charging party fails to present facts that establish the employer engaged in misrepresentation. Moreover, even if the allegation of misrepresentation is taken as true, a single indicia of bad faith is not sufficient to establish a prima facie case for bad faith bargaining under the totality of circumstances test.

604.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; REFUSAL TO PROVIDE INFORMATION
604.01000 – In General

Where charging party was aware that the employer held back information at least 18 months prior to filing amended charge, the allegation of failure to provide requested information was untimely. PERB is prohibited from issuing a complaint with respect to “any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge.” The limitations period for new allegations in an amended charge is based on the filing date of the amended charge.

606.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES
606.01000 – In General

A party to a fact finding hearing does not violate EERA by failing to present all information that the other party wishes it would, or putting its own spin on the data. Charging party fails to present facts that establish the employer engaged in misrepresentation. Moreover, even if the allegation of misrepresentation is taken as true, a single indicia of bad faith is not sufficient to establish a prima facie case for bad faith bargaining under the totality of circumstances test.

606.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES
606.17000 – Failure to Provide Information

Where charging party was aware that the employer held back information at least 18 months prior to filing amended charge, the allegation of failure to provide requested information was untimely. PERB is prohibited from issuing a complaint with respect to “any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge.” The limitations period for new allegations in an amended charge is based on the filing date of the amended charge.

606.00000 – EMPLOYER REFUSAL TO BARGAIN IN GOOD FAITH; NEGOTIATIONS; INDICIA OF SURFACE OR BAD FAITH BARGAINING; TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES
606.19000 – Concealment/Misrepresentation

A party to a fact finding hearing does not violate EERA by failing to present all information that the other party wishes it would, or putting its own spin on the data. Charging party fails to present facts that establish the employer engaged in misrepresentation. Moreover, even if the allegation of misrepresentation is taken as true, a single indicia of bad faith is not sufficient to establish a prima facie case for bad faith bargaining under the totality of circumstances test.

1101.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE
1101.01000 – In General

Where charging party was aware that the employer held back information at least 18 months prior to filing amended charge, the allegation of failure to provide requested information was untimely. PERB is prohibited from issuing a complaint with respect to “any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge.” The limitations period for new allegations in an amended charge is based on the filing date of the amended charge.

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

Where charging party was aware that the employer held back information at least 18 months prior to filing amended charge, the allegation of failure to provide requested information was untimely. PERB is prohibited from issuing a complaint with respect to “any charge based upon an alleged unfair practice occurring more than six months prior to the filing of the charge.” The limitations period for new allegations in an amended charge is based on the filing date of the amended charge.