Oakdale Joint Union High School District (PERB 0620E)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
OAKDALE 	DISTRICT 	ORGANIZATION OF
CLASSROOM 	TEACHERS,
Charging 	Party,
v.
OAKDALE 	JOINT UNION HIGH 	SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
Respondent.
)
)
)
) 	Case 	No. 	S-CE-1026
PERB 	Decision 	No. 	620
May 	20, 	1987
)
)
)
)
' 	)
)
)
Appearance; 	Ken Burt, 	Attorney, 	for Oakdale District
Organization 	of 	Classroom 	Teachers.
Before Hesse, 	Chairperson; 	Porter and Craib, 	Members.
DECISION AND 	ORDER
HESSE, 	Chairperson: 	This 	case 	is before the 	Public
Employment 	Relations 	Board 	(PERB or Board) 	on 	appeal 	of a
partial 	dismissal 	by a 	Board 	agent 	of 	an 	unfair practice
charge. 	Charging party, 	Oakdale 	District 	Organization of
Classroom Teachers, 	alleges 	that 	respondent, 	Oakdale Joint
Union 	High School 	District, 	violated 	section 	3543.5(c) 	of 	the
Educational 	Employment 	Relations 	Act 	(EERA)1 by 	unilaterally
altering 	a 	policy 	regarding 	complaints 	against 	teachers.
On May 12, 	1987, 	the general 	counsel 	of this agency
requested 	that 	this 	case 	be 	remanded 	for 	further 	investigation.
The 	Board 	has 	adopted 	a 	procedure 	whereby 	the 	general 	counsel
1 EERA 	is 	codified 	at 	Government 	Code 	section 	3540 	et 	seq.
____________ }

conducts 	a 	routine 	review of 	cases 	dismissed by Board 	agents.
As 	the 	Board 	noted 	in 	response 	to a 	similar 	request 	in
California State Employees' 	Association 	(Morrow) 	(1986) 	PERB
Decision No. 	568-S, 	the purpose of 	the 	review procedure 	is 	to
minimize, 	and hopefully 	reduce, 	appellate 	litigation prompted
by 	inadequacies 	in 	the processing 	of 	unfair practice 	charges.
A 	request 	for 	remand 	reflects 	the 	general 	counsel's 	reasoned
conclusion 	that 	further 	investigation 	would 	serve 	that
purpose. 	We 	conclude 	that 	the 	request 	for 	remand 	should be
granted.
Therefore, 	upon 	review of 	the entire 	record, 	we 	find that
the 	case 	is 	appropriately 	REMANDED to the 	general 	counsel 	for
further 	investigatory proceedings. 	It 	is 	so ORDERED.
Members 	Porter 	and 	Craib 	joined 	in 	this 	Decision.
22