Decision 2225M – Service Employees International Union Local 1021 (Joshua)
SF-CO-233-M
Decision Date: November 30, 2011
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The charge alleged that SEIU Local 1021 breached its duty of fair representation by failing to file a grievance on his behalf concerning his employment with the City and County of San Francisco, Recreation and Parks Department.
Disposition: The Board upheld the dismissal of the charge for failure to state a prima facie violation of the duty of fair representation.
Perc Vol: 36
Perc Index: 92
Decision Headnotes
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
Charge failed to state prima facie violation of duty of fair representation for failure to file a grievance, where it was not clear whether charge alleged failure to file grievance under an applicable collective bargaining agreement or a complaint in another forum. Duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. Union does not have a duty to represent an employee with respect to extra-contractual proceedings that are not within the scope of a collective bargaining agreement. In the absence of evidence that the exclusive representative’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant, “a breach of the duty of fair representation is not stated merely because an exclusive representative declines to proceed or negligently forgets to file a timely appeal of a grievance.”
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration
Charge failed to state prima facie violation of duty of fair representation for failure to file a grievance, where it was not clear whether charge alleged failure to file grievance under an applicable collective bargaining agreement or a complaint in another forum. Duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. Union does not have a duty to represent an employee with respect to extra-contractual proceedings that are not within the scope of a collective bargaining agreement. In the absence of evidence that the exclusive representative’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant, “a breach of the duty of fair representation is not stated merely because an exclusive representative declines to proceed or negligently forgets to file a timely appeal of a grievance.”
800.05000 – Mode or Adequacy of Representation/Advocacy
Charge failed to state prima facie violation of duty of fair representation for failure to file a grievance, where it was not clear whether charge alleged failure to file grievance under an applicable collective bargaining agreement or a complaint in another forum. Duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. Union does not have a duty to represent an employee with respect to extra-contractual proceedings that are not within the scope of a collective bargaining agreement. In the absence of evidence that the exclusive representative’s negligence foreclosed any remedy for the grievant, “a breach of the duty of fair representation is not stated merely because an exclusive representative declines to proceed or negligently forgets to file a timely appeal of a grievance.”
1100.05000 – Dismissal of Charge; Appeal
No good cause to consider new factual allegations provided for the first time on appeal where no reason provided why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.
1107.04000 – Unalleged Violations
No good cause to consider new factual allegations provided for the first time on appeal where no reason provided why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.
1109.01000 – In General
No good cause to consider new factual allegations provided for the first time on appeal where no reason provided why they could not have been alleged in the original charge or in an amended charge.