Decision 2626E – Orcutt Union Elementary School District
LA-CE-6145-E
Decision Date: February 22, 2019
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: The Association excepted to a proposed decision dismissing its complaint and unfair practice charge as untimely filed.
Disposition: The Board adopted the proposed decision, finding that the Association failed to timely file its unilateral change charge within the statute of limitations. The Board rejected the Association’s argument that the limitations period should have been equitably tolled during the parties’ subsequent efforts to negotiate the foreseeable effects of the District’s change in policy.
Perc Vol: 43
Perc Index: 140
Decision Headnotes
1101.01000 – In General
The six-month statute of limitations period may be tolled either by statute or the doctrine of equitable tolling. (p. 4, fn. 4.)
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
Under EERA section 3541.5, subd. (a)(2), the limitations period is subject to statutory tolling during the time it takes to exhaust any grievance machinery that ends in binding arbitration and that covers the matter at issue in the unfair practice charge. (p. 4, fn. 4.)
1101.03000 – Computation of Six-Month Period
The limitations period may be equitably tolled while the parties utilize a non-binding dispute resolution procedure if: (1) the procedure is contained in a written agreement negotiated by the parties, (2) the procedure is being used to resolve the same dispute that is the subject of the unfair practice charge, (3) the charging party reasonably and in good faith pursues the procedure, and (4) tolling does not frustrate the purpose of the statutory limitation period by causing surprise or prejudice to the respondent. (pp. 4-5)
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling
Under EERA section 3541.5, subd. (a)(2), the limitations period is subject to statutory tolling during the time it takes to exhaust any grievance machinery that ends in binding arbitration and that covers the matter at issue in the unfair practice charge. (p. 4, fn. 4.)
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling
The limitations period may be equitably tolled while the parties utilize a non-binding dispute resolution procedure if: (1) the procedure is contained in a written agreement negotiated by the parties, (2) the procedure is being used to resolve the same dispute that is the subject of the unfair practice charge, (3) the charging party reasonably and in good faith pursues the procedure, and (4) tolling does not frustrate the purpose of the statutory limitation period by causing surprise or prejudice to the respondent. (pp. 4-5)
1101.06000 – Statutory and Equitable Tolling
In a unilateral change case, the limitations period is not tolled during the parties’ subsequent efforts to negotiate the foreseeable effects of the change. (p. 4.) First, the parties’ bargaining obligations are from statute, not a dispute resolution procedure contained in a negotiated written agreement. Second, the parties’ effects bargaining procedures were not used to resolve the same dispute that is the subject of the charge: an alleged unilateral change. (p. 5.)