Decision I056H – Trustees of the California State University (East Bay)
SF-CE-995-H
Decision Date: June 7, 2013
Decision Type: Injunctive Relief
Description: Request for injunctive relief was filed by an individual who alleged his dismissal from employment was done in retaliation for protected activity.
Disposition: The Board denied the request, holding that injunctive relief in this case was not “just and proper.” Charging party’s alleged emotional pain and suffering and harm to reputation is not within PERB’s jurisdiction to remedy. The economic losses alleged can be remedied at the conclusion of the administrative process. There was no showing that injunctive relief was necessary either to preserve PERB’s remedial authority or to stop any chilling effect the employer’s conduct might have on the rights of other employees or on organizing efforts.
Perc Vol: 38
Perc Index: 7
Decision Headnotes
1207.02000 – Standards for Obtaining Injunctive Relief
Generally, injunctive relief is not “just and proper” when the basis for the claim of irreparable harm is in the nature of emotional pain and suffering and harm to reputational interests, since PERB does not have the authority to grant such relief, either prospectively or at the conclusion of its administrative proceedings. Generally, injunctive relief is not “just and proper” when the types of injury that charging party alleges are lost wages and loss of health benefits, which can be remedied at the conclusion of the administrative proceedings in the event charging party’s unfair practice complaint is successful. Even if dismissal from employment is likely to create financial hardship, that alone is not a criterion for seeking injunctive relief.