International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 501, AFL-CIO (Irvin) (PERB 0862H)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
DAVID W. 	IRVIN,
Charging 	Party,
v.
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS, 	LOCAL 501, 	AFL-CIO,
Respondent.
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-CO-29-H
PERB Decision No. 	862-H
December 	20, 	1990
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearance: 	Daniel Dillon for David W. 	Irvin.
Before Hesse, 	Chairperson; 	Shank and Camilli, 	Members.
DECISION AND 	ORDER
CAMILLI, 	Member: 	This 	case is before the Public Employment
Relations 	Board 	(PERB or Board) 	on appeal by David W. 	Irvin
(Irvin) 	of a Board agent's dismissal of his 	charge that the
International Union of Operating Engineers, 	Local 	501, 	AFL-CIO
violated 	section 3571.l(b) 	and 	(e) 	of the Higher Education
Employer-Employee Relations Act 	(HEERA),1 when it refused to
HEERA 	is 	codified at Government Code 	section 	3560 	et 	seq.
Unless 	otherwise 	indicated, 	all 	statutory references 	are to 	the
Government Code. 	Section 3571.1 	states, 	in pertinent part:
It 	shall 	be unlawful 	for an employee
organization to:
(b) 	Impose or threaten to 	impose reprisals
on employees, 	to discriminate or threaten to
discriminate against employees, 	or otherwise
to interfere with, 	restrain, 	or coerce
employees 	because of 	their 	exercise 	of 	rights
guaranteed by 	this 	chapter.
(e) 	Fail 	to represent 	fairly and 	impartially
all 	the 	employees 	in the unit 	for which 	it 	is
the 	exclusive 	representative.
_______________ )
I

proceed 	to 	arbitration or allow a 	third party 	to proceed 	to
arbitration on 	Irvin's 	grievance.
On December 	12, 	1990, 	the PERB General Counsel requested
that 	this 	case be remanded 	for 	further 	investigation. 	The Board
has 	adopted 	a procedure whereby the General 	Counsel 	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. 	The 	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, 	the Board
ORDERS 	that Case No. 	LA-CO-29-H be REMANDED to the General
Counsel 	for 	further 	investigatory proceedings.
Chairperson Hesse 	and Member 	Shank 	joined 	in this 	Decision.
2
- 	- 	------------
2