Decision A392M – Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District

SA-CE-711-M

Decision Date: January 19, 2012

Decision Type: Administrative Appeal

Description:  The Stanislaus Consolidated Fire Protection District failed to file its response to the union’s appeal from a partial dismissal of an unfair practice charge in a timely fashion.

Disposition:  The Board upheld the administrative determination by the Appeals Assistant that the response was untimely, concluding that there was no good cause to excuse the untimeliness.

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 36
Perc Index: 108

Decision Headnotes

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

Board did not find good cause to excuse respondent’s late-filed response to the appeal from the partial dismissal of the unfair practice charge under PERB Regulation 32136 where respondent filed its response eight days late and failed to supply the Board with any reasons for its late filing, thus depriving the Board the opportunity to determine whether the respondent made an honest mistake or whether the delay resulted from circumstances beyond respondent’s control or excusable misinformation for purposes of evaluating whether respondent made a conscientious effort to timely file; Board will not find good cause to excuse a late filing based on lack of prejudice alone where the Board is unable to determine whether respondent’s reasons for the late filing were reasonable and credible.

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

Board did not find good cause to excuse respondent’s late-filed response to the appeal from the partial dismissal of the unfair practice charge under PERB Regulation 32136 where respondent filed its response eight days late and failed to supply the Board with any reasons for its late filing, thus depriving the Board the opportunity to determine whether the respondent made an honest mistake or whether the delay resulted from circumstances beyond respondent’s control or excusable misinformation for purposes of evaluating whether respondent made a conscientious effort to timely file; Board will not find good cause to excuse a late filing based on lack of prejudice alone where the Board is unable to determine whether respondent’s reasons for the late filing were reasonable and credible.

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

Board did not find good cause to excuse respondent’s late-filed response to the appeal from the partial dismissal of the unfair practice charge under PERB Regulation 32136 where respondent filed its response eight days late and failed to supply the Board with any reasons for its late filing, thus depriving the Board the opportunity to determine whether the respondent made an honest mistake or whether the delay resulted from circumstances beyond respondent’s control or excusable misinformation for purposes of evaluating whether respondent made a conscientious effort to timely file; Board will not find good cause to excuse a late filing based on lack of prejudice alone where the Board is unable to determine whether respondent’s reasons for the late filing were reasonable and credible.