Decision 2186M – Service Employees International Union Local 521 (Chow)

Charge failed to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation based upon union’s alleged failure to adequately assist charging party in resolving what she perceived as a hostile work environment in her employment. While the duty of fair representation extends to grievance handling by the exclusive representative a reasonable decision not to pursue a grievance, regardless of the merits of the grievance, is not a violation of the duty of fair representation. In order for PERB to find a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charge must include facts demonstrating that the union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Charge fails to set forth facts demonstrating that union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary or in bad faith, that it abused its discretion or that its actions were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Merely alleging that the union failed to return every phone call is insufficient to establish an overall pattern of conduct. As such, the charge fails to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation.

Charge failed to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation based upon union’s alleged failure to adequately assist charging party in resolving what she perceived as a hostile work environment in her employment. While the duty of fair representation extends to grievance handling by the exclusive representative a reasonable decision not to pursue a grievance, regardless of the merits of the grievance, is not a violation of the duty of fair representation. In order for PERB to find a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charge must include facts demonstrating that the union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Charge fails to set forth facts demonstrating that union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary or in bad faith, that it abused its discretion or that its actions were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Merely alleging that the union failed to return every phone call is insufficient to establish an overall pattern of conduct. As such, the charge fails to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation.

Charge failed to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation based upon union’s alleged failure to adequately assist charging party in resolving what she perceived as a hostile work environment in her employment. While the duty of fair representation extends to grievance handling by the exclusive representative a reasonable decision not to pursue a grievance, regardless of the merits of the grievance, is not a violation of the duty of fair representation. In order for PERB to find a breach of the duty of fair representation, the charge must include facts demonstrating that the union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary, discriminatory or in bad faith. Charge fails to set forth facts demonstrating that union’s decision not to pursue a grievance was arbitrary or in bad faith, that it abused its discretion or that its actions were without a rational basis or devoid of honest judgment. Merely alleging that the union failed to return every phone call is insufficient to establish an overall pattern of conduct. As such, the charge fails to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation.

In computing the time period for filing an appeal from dismissal, a five-day extension of time applies to any filing made in response to documents served by mail. When the last day to perform an act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the time period for filing is extended to the next business day. Where last day to file appeal following service of dismissal by mail fell on a State holiday, appeal filed the next business day was timely. Pursuant to PERB Regulation 32635(b), no good cause found to consider new allegations and evidence on appeal, where all of the dates of the events alleged for the first time on appeal predate the dismissal of the charge and the appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.

In computing the time period for filing an appeal from dismissal, a five-day extension of time applies to any filing made in response to documents served by mail. When the last day to perform an act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the time period for filing is extended to the next business day. Where last day to file appeal following service of dismissal by mail fell on a State holiday, appeal filed the next business day was timely. Pursuant to PERB Regulation 32635(b), no good cause found to consider new allegations and evidence on appeal, where all of the dates of the events alleged for the first time on appeal predate the dismissal of the charge and the appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.

In computing the time period for filing an appeal from dismissal, a five-day extension of time applies to any filing made in response to documents served by mail. When the last day to perform an act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or holiday, the time period for filing is extended to the next business day. Where last day to file appeal following service of dismissal by mail fell on a State holiday, appeal filed the next business day was timely.

Pursuant to PERB Regulation 32635(b), no good cause found to consider new allegations and evidence on appeal, where all of the dates of the events alleged for the first time on appeal predate the dismissal of the charge and the appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.