Decision 2265E – Oxnard Union High School District

LA-CE-5421-E

Decision Date: May 25, 2012

Decision Type: PERB Decision

View Full Text (PDF)

Decision Headnotes

405.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; THREATS OR PROMISES
405.02000 – Express or Implied Threats

Where charge alleged that the respondent offered suggestions regarding curriculum issues after “implying” there were student complaints regarding charging party’s teaching techniques, and where charge implied that such conduct was connected to a comment made to her by a union representative that she could expect “repercussions” from the school district if she pursued her grievance with a private attorney, charge failed to state prima facie case of interference; respondent’s discussion with charging party concerning the curriculum cannot objectively be found to tend to discourage charging party from exercising protected rights and unions and employers are not liable for each other’s conduct.

503.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; ADVERSE ACTIONS
503.03000 – Warning Letters, Reprimands, Evaluations

PERB has found that not all verbal expressions of concern about an employee’s conduct rise to the level of a verbal reprimand for purposes of determining whether there has been an adverse action; where charge alleged that the respondent offered suggestions regarding curriculum issues after “implying” that there were student complaints regarding charging party’s teaching techniques, the respondent’s actions cannot be found to be adverse under an objective standard.

503.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; ADVERSE ACTIONS
503.11000 – Hours and Overtime, Work Schedules

A reduction in work hours, which necessarily reduces wages, is an adverse employment action.

504.00000 – EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; EVIDENCE OF UNLAWFUL MOTIVATION; NEXUS
504.04000 – Timing of Action

PERB has held that where the adverse action precedes the exercise of protected rights, the necessary nexus between the adverse action and the protected activity is not shown; where the only instance of protected conduct of seeking the union’s assistance to file a grievance occurred after the alleged adverse action of reducing charging party’s hours, the reduction in hours does not demonstrate retaliation against charging party for her protected activity.

1100.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; CHARGE
1100.03000 – Standing

Individual employees lack standing to allege bargaining violations, including unilateral change violations, and violations of EERA sections that protect the collective bargaining rights of employee organizations.

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

Under PERB Regulation 32635, subdivision (a), the appeal must sufficiently place the Board and the respondent on notice of the issues raised on appeal; an appeal that merely reiterates facts alleged in the unfair practice charge, or does not reference the substance of the Board agent’s dismissal, fails to comply with PERB Regulation 32635, subdivision (a); where appeal consisted of a repaginated effective duplicate of the supplement to the amended charge and a letter asserting that the entire amended charge was the basis for the appeal, and failed 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 was taken, the page or part of the dismissal to which the appeal was taken, or the ground for each issue stated, the appeal was subject to dismissal.

1107.00000 – CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES;PROCEDURES BEFORE THE BOARD
1107.01000 – Exceptions; Responses to Exceptions; Standing; Extensions of Time/Late Filing/Waiver

Individual employees lack standing to allege bargaining violations, including unilateral change violations, and violations of EERA sections that protect the collective bargaining rights of employee organizations.

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

Under PERB Regulation 32635, subdivision (a), the appeal must sufficiently place the Board and the respondent on notice of the issues raised on appeal; an appeal that merely reiterates facts alleged in the unfair practice charge, or does not reference the substance of the Board agent’s dismissal, fails to comply with PERB Regulation 32635, subdivision (a); where appeal consisted of a repaginated effective duplicate of the supplement to the amended charge and a letter asserting that the entire amended charge was the basis for the appeal, and failed 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 was taken, the page or part of the dismissal to which the appeal was taken, or the ground for each issue stated, the appeal was subject to dismissal.