Decision 2208E – California School Employees Association and its Chapter 724 (Davis)

LA-CO-1448-E

Decision Date: October 6, 2011

Decision Type: PERB Decision

Description:  The charge alleged that CSEA breached its duty of fair representation by failing to file grievance on charging party’s behalf.

Disposition:  The Board affirmed the dismissal of the charge for failure to state a prima face case of violation of the duty of fair representation.

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 36
Perc Index: 61

Decision Headnotes

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case

The mere fact that union attempted to resolve employee’s concerns through an informal process rather than through the formal grievance process does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Replacement of one mediation representative with another does not establish violation of duty of fair representation, as selection of representative is an internal union activity not subject to PERB review.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration

The mere fact that union attempted to resolve employee’s concerns through an informal process rather than through the formal grievance process does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Replacement of one mediation representative with another does not establish violation of duty of fair representation, as selection of representative is an internal union activity not subject to PERB review.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.05000 – Mode or Adequacy of Representation/Advocacy

The mere fact that union attempted to resolve employee’s concerns through an informal process rather than through the formal grievance process does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Replacement of one mediation representative with another does not establish violation of duty of fair representation, as selection of representative is an internal union activity not subject to PERB review.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.05000 – Dismissal of Charge; Appeal

To satisfy the requirements of PERB Regulation 32635(a), the appeal must sufficiently place the Board “on notice of the issues raised on appeal.” Appeal that merely restates facts alleged in the original charge, but fails to reference any portion of the Board agent’s determination or otherwise identify the specific issues of procedure, fact, law or rationale to which the appeal is taken, the page or part of the dismissal to which appeal is taken, or grounds for each issue, is subject to dismissal. No good cause exists to consider documents presented for the first time on appeal that are either undated or bear dates that predate the dismissal of the charge, where appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.

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

The mere fact that union attempted to resolve employee’s concerns through an informal process rather than through the formal grievance process does not establish a violation of the duty of fair representation. Accordingly, employee’s discovery that union pursued informal resolution does not preserve timeliness of claim. Instead, statute of limitations began to run when charging party knew or should have known that assistance from the union was not forthcoming.

1109.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; ISSUES ON APPEAL
1109.01000 – In General

To satisfy the requirements of PERB Regulation 32635(a), the appeal must sufficiently place the Board “on notice of the issues raised on appeal.” Appeal that merely restates facts alleged in the original charge, but fails to reference any portion of the Board agent’s determination or otherwise identify the specific issues of procedure, fact, law or rationale to which the appeal is taken, the page or part of the dismissal to which appeal is taken, or grounds for each issue, is subject to dismissal. No good cause exists to consider documents presented for the first time on appeal that are either undated or bear dates that predate the dismissal of the charge, where appeal provides no reason why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.