Decision A519H – Regents of the University of California (Los Angeles)
LA-CE-1384-H
Decision Date: September 5, 2024
Decision Type: Administrative Appeal
Description: PERB Regulation 32300(b), as revised in 2022, directs an excepting party to file “a single integrated document that must not exceed 14,000 words, including footnotes,” and which “may be in the form of a brief.” In this case, however, Respondent instead filed two separate documents, following a practice that Regulation 32300 permitted before 2022. PERB’s Appeals Office rejected Respondent’s exceptions and supporting brief because Respondent filed two documents rather than a single document. Respondent appealed the administrative determination.
Disposition: The Board partially granted Respondent’s unopposed appeal. PERB has discretion whether to accept or reject either or both documents, or to grant an extension of time to allow an adjusted filing that would comply with PERB Regulations. Although either of Respondent’s two filings would have been sufficient to allow the Board to research and resolve the matter, the Board allowed the filing of Respondent’s brief because it was more integrated and useful, while disallowing Respondent’s other filing.
Perc Vol: 49
Perc Index: 56
Decision Headnotes
1107.21000 – Administrative Appeals
PERB Regulation 32300(b), as revised in 2022, directs an excepting party to file “a single integrated document that must not exceed 14,000 words, including footnotes,” and which “may be in the form of a brief.” In this case, however, Respondent instead filed two separate documents, following a practice that Regulation 32300 permitted before 2022. PERB’s Appeals Office rejected Respondent’s exceptions and supporting brief because Respondent filed two documents rather than a single document. PERB has discretion whether to accept or reject either or both documents, or to grant an extension of time to allow an adjusted filing that would comply with PERB Regulations. (Regents of the University of California (2023) PERB Decision No. 2880-H, p. 6; The Accelerated Schools (2023) PERB Decision No. 2855, pp. 8-9; PERB Regs. 32132 & 32136.) Although either of Respondent’s two filings would have been sufficient to allow the Board to research and resolve the matter, the Board allowed the filing of Respondent’s brief because it was more integrated and useful, while disallowing Respondent’s other filing. (pp. 1-2.)