California State Employees Association (Rebosura) (PERB A245S)

STATE
	OF
	CALIFORNIA
DECISION
	OF
	THE
PUBLIC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELATIONS
	BOARD
MENCHU
	Y. 	REBOSURA,
Charging
	Party,
v.
CALIFORNIA STATE
	EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
}
)
)
)
)
}
_
_____,
__________________ )
Case
	No.
	SF-CO-22-S
Administrative
	Appeal
PERB
	Order
	No. 	Ad-245-S
May	
5 1 	1993
Appearance:	
Menchu
	Y.
	Rebosura,
	on
	her
	own
	behalf.
Before
	Blair,
	Chair; 	Caffrey
	and
	Carlyle,
	Members.
DECISION
CAFFREY,
	Member:
	This 	case
	is
	before 	the 	Public
	Employment
Relations
	Board
	(PERB
	or
	Board) 	on
	appeal
	by
Menchu
	Y.
	Rebosura
(Rebosura)
	of
	the
	PERE
	appeals
	assistant's
	rejection
	of
Rebosura's 	untimely 	request 	for
	an
	extension 	of 	time.
	Rebosura
sought 	an
	extension 	of 	time
	to
	file
	an
	appeal 	of
	a
	Board
	agent's
dismissal
	of 	her 	unfair 	practice
	charge.
The
	Board
	agent's 	dismissal
	was
	served
	on 	Rebosura 	by
	mail
on
	February
	22, 	1993.
1	
The
	dismissal
	letter
	included 	information
concerning 	the
	filing
	of 	an 	appeal
	and
	a
	request 	for
	an
	extension
of 	time.
In
	accordance 	with
	PERE
	regulations,
2	
an 	appeal 	of 	the
dismissal
	was 	due
	to
	be
	filed
	on
	or 	before
	March 	19.
	PERE
Regulation 	section
	32132
	states, 	in 	pertinent 	part:
1
All 	dates 	herein 	refer 	to
	1993, 	unless 	otherwise 	noted.
2PERB
	regulations 	are 	codified 	at 	California
	Code 	of
Regulations, 	title
	8, 	section 	31001 	et 	seq.

N
(a) 	A request 	for 	an 	extension 	of 	time
within 	which 	to 	file 	any document 	with 	the
Board 	itself 	shall 	be 	in 	writing 	and 	shall 	be
filed 	at 	the 	headquarters 	office 	at 	least
three 	days 	before 	the 	expiration 	of 	the 	time
required 	for 	filing.
Rebosura's 	letter 	requesting 	an 	extension 	of 	time 	is 	dated
March 	16. 	It 	was 	sent 	by 	regular 	mail 	postmarked March 	17, 	and
was 	not 	received 	and 	filed 	at 	PERB's 	headquarters 	office 	until
March 	22. 	As 	a 	result, 	the 	PERB 	appeals 	assistant 	rejected
Rebosura's 	extension 	of 	time 	request 	as 	untimely 	filed.
Rebosura's 	appeal 	of 	the 	late 	filing 	rejection 	questions 	the
efficiency 	of 	the 	mail 	service 	and 	reiterates 	some 	of 	the
concerns 	underlying 	the 	dismissed 	unfair 	practice 	charge.
PERE 	Regulation 	section 	32136 	authorizes 	the 	Board 	to 	excuse
a 	late 	filing 	for 	good 	cause 	only.
In 	her 	appeal, 	Rebosura 	has 	not 	provided 	an 	adequate
explanation 	of 	her 	failure 	to 	comply with 	the 	filing 	deadline
discussed 	in 	the 	dismissal 	letter. 	Therefore, 	the 	Board 	finds
that 	good 	cause 	does 	not 	exist 	to 	excuse 	the 	late 	filing 	of 	the
request 	for 	an 	extension 	of 	time.
ORDER
Rebosura's 	appeal 	of 	the 	PERB 	appeals 	assistant's 	rejection
of 	her 	request 	for 	an 	extension 	of 	time 	as 	untimely 	filed, 	is
hereby 	DENIED.
Chair 	Blair 	and Member 	Carlyle 	joined 	in 	this 	Decision.
2