Decision 2643E – California School Employees Association (Williams)
LA-CO-1694-E
Decision Date: May 17, 2019
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Charging party excepted to a proposed remedy. The ALJ dismissed allegations that CSEA breached its duty of fair representation by not filing a grievance on her behalf but ruled in her favor based on CSEA’s subsequent failure to provide her with the reason for not filing the grievance. The proposed decision included an order that CSEA provide charging party with a written explanation of its reasons for not pursuing her requested grievance.
Disposition: The Board affirmed the proposed remedy, dismissing charging party’s claim that she was entitled to monetary “make whole” remedies as a prevailing party. Charging party did not except to the ALJ’s determination that her grievance lacked merit. Thus, there was no basis for the Board to provide monetary relief.
Perc Vol: 43
Perc Index: 185
Decision Headnotes
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make the employee whole if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.)
1107.01000 – Exceptions; Responses to Exceptions; Standing; Extensions of Time/Late Filing/Waiver
When neither party excepts to the merits of a proposed decision, the merits are not before the Board and are thus final and binding only on the parties to that proposed decision. (p. 2, fn. 2.)
1107.05000 – Precedential Authority of PERB Decisions
When neither party excepts to the merits of a proposed decision, the merits are not before the Board and are thus final and binding only on the parties to that proposed decision. (p. 2, fn. 2.)
1107.18000 – Review of Findings Not Excepted To
When neither party excepts to the merits of a proposed decision, the merits are not before the Board and are thus final and binding only on the parties to that proposed decision. (p. 2, fn. 2.)
1108.01000 – In General
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make the employee whole if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.)
1201.01000 – In General
EERA section 3541.5(c) grants PERB “broad remedial powers to effectuate the purposes of the EERA,” including an award of monetary damages when such relief is necessary to place the injured party in the position it would have been in had the wrongful conduct not occurred, i.e., to make the injured party “whole.” But PERB does not presume damages on the part of employees, even where the representative has failed to adequately represent them. (p. 7.)
1201.01000 – In General
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make the employee whole if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.) Charging Party was bound by the ALJ’s conclusion that her requested grievance lacked merit because she did not except to it. With no basis for the Board to conclude that she would have prevailed on her requested grievance, she was not allowed monetary relief. (p. 8)
1201.03000 – Back Pay; Interest
EERA section 3541.5(c) grants PERB “broad remedial powers to effectuate the purposes of the EERA,” including an award of monetary damages when such relief is necessary to place the injured party in the position it would have been in had the wrongful conduct not occurred, i.e., to make the injured party “whole.” But PERB does not presume damages on the part of employees, even where the representative has failed to adequately represent them. (p. 7.)
1201.01000 – In General
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make whole relief if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.) Charging Party is bound by the ALJ’s conclusion that her requested grievance lacked merit because she did not except to it. With no basis for the Board to conclude that she would have prevailed on her requested grievance, she is not allowed monetary relief. (p. 8)
1201.08000 – Other
EERA section 3541.5(c) grants PERB “broad remedial powers to effectuate the purposes of the EERA,” including an award of monetary damages when such relief is necessary to place the injured party in the position it would have been in had the wrongful conduct not occurred, i.e., to make the injured party “whole.” But PERB does not presume damages on the part of employees, even where the representative has failed to adequately represent them. (p. 7.)
1201.08000 – Other
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make whole relief if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.) Charging Party was bound by the ALJ’s conclusion that her requested grievance lacked merit because she did not except to it. With no basis for the Board to conclude that she would have prevailed on her requested grievance, she was not allowed monetary relief. (p. 8)
1202.01000 – In General
EERA section 3541.5(c) grants PERB “broad remedial powers to effectuate the purposes of the EERA,” including an award of monetary damages when such relief is necessary to place the injured party in the position it would have been in had the wrongful conduct not occurred, i.e., to make the injured party “whole.” But PERB does not presume damages on the part of employees, even where the representative has failed to adequately represent them. (p. 7.)
1204.01000 – In General
When a union fails to fairly represent an employee in grievance processing, the employee is not entitled to make whole relief unless he or she would have prevailed had the union properly processed the grievance. (p. 8.) In such case, the typical remedy is an order that the union process the grievance or make whole relief if that process is not available or would be ineffectual. The latter remedy requires the employee prove in compliance proceedings that he or she would have prevailed on a properly process grievance. (p. 8, fn. 5.) Charging Party was bound by the ALJ’s conclusion that her requested grievance lacked merit because she did not except to it. With no basis for the Board to conclude that she would have prevailed on her requested grievance, she was not allowed monetary relief. (p. 8)
1503.01000 – In General
When neither party excepts to the merits of a proposed decision, the merits are not before the Board and are thus final and binding only on the parties to that proposed decision. (PERB Regulations 32300(c), 32305(a).) (p. 2, fn. 2.)
1503.03000 – Regulations Considered (By Number) (Continued)
When neither party excepts to the merits of a proposed decision, the merits are not before the Board and are thus final and binding only on the parties to that proposed decision. (PERB Regulations 32300(c), 32305(a).) (p. 2, fn. 2.)