Decision 2707M – County of Riverside
Decision Date: April 15, 2020
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: An administrative law judge found that the County violated the MMBA by terminating an employee for engaging in protected activity. The ALJ dismissed all other allegations in the complaint, including the allegation that an investigatory interview of the employee constituted unlawful interference. The County filed exceptions and the Union filed cross-exceptions.
Disposition: While the matter was pending before the Board on the County’s exceptions and the Union’s cross-exceptions to the proposed decision, the parties notified PERB that they had settled the matter along with other pending unfair practice charges. The Board found that it was in the best interest of the parties, and consistent with the purposes of the MMBA, to grant the parties’ request to withdraw their exceptions, dismiss the complaint and underlying unfair practice charge with prejudice, and vacate the proposed decision.
Perc Vol: 44
Perc Index: 161
1107.15000 – Withdrawal of Appeal; Request that Decision be Vacated
As part of the Board’s authority to take any action in a pending case that the Board deems necessary to discharge its duties and effectuate the purposes of the labor relations laws that PERB enforces, the Board has discretion to grant or deny requests to withdraw and dismiss cases pending before the Board itself. (MMBA, § 3509, subd. (a); EERA, § 3541.3, subds. (i) and (n); Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (2019) PERB Decision No. 2656-M, p. 2; City of Santa Rosa (Fire Department) (2019) PERB Decision No. 2653-M, p. 2.) Board found withdrawal of the parties’ exceptions and cross-exceptions and request for dismissal of the complaint and underlying unfair practice charge pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties to be consistent with the MMBA’s purpose of promoting harmonious labor relations and granted requests. Parties’ exceptions and cross-exceptions to the proposed decision deemed withdrawn, complaint and underlying unfair practice charge dismissed with prejudice, and proposed decision vacated.