Los Angeles Unified School District (Wightman) (PERB 0425E)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
VICTOR WIGHTMAN,
Charging Party,
v.
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED 	SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
Respondent.
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-CE-1766
PERB Decision No. 	425
October 	26, 	1984
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	Victor Wightman and Jules 	Kimmett 	for 	Charging
Party; 	O'Melveny & Myers 	by Joel Grossman 	for Respondent.
Before Hesse, 	Chairperson; 	Tovar and Morgenstern, 	Members.
DECISION AND 	ORDER
HESSE, 	Chairperson: 	Charging Party has 	set forth in
his 	charge allegations 	against 	four "'Gentlemen' 	of the Los
Angeles 	Unified 	School 	District." 	We 	find 	these 	assertions
of wrongdoing under 	the Educational 	Employment Relations 	Act
1(EERA)1 to be uniformly without merit. 	On appeal, 	Charging
Party advances 	no 	legal 	arguments 	that persuade us 	that 	the
regional 	attorney was 	incorrect 	in his judgment. 	We 	therefore
summarily 	affirm 	the 	regional 	attorney's 	determination and
adopt 	the 	attached 	letter 	of dismissal as 	the decision of 	the
Board 	itself.
Members 	Tovar 	and Morgenstern joined 	in 	this 	Decision.
1 EERA 	is 	codified at Government 	Code 	section 	3540 	et 	seq.1
__________ )

STATE OF CALIFORNIA 	GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
Headquarters Office
1031 18th Street
Sacramento, California 95814
(916) 322-3088
June 29, 	1983
Joel M. Grossman, Atty.
O'Melveny 	& 	Myers
1800 Century Park East, 	Suite 600
Los Angeles, 	CA 	90067
Jules 	Kimmett
1106 	D West Olive Avenue
Burbank, 	CA 	91506
RE: 	REFUSAL TO 	ISSUE COMPLAINT AND DISMISSAL 	OF UNFAIR
PRACTICE CHARGE; 	Victor 	Wightman v. 	Los Angeles USD
Charge No. 	LA-CE-1766
Dear Parties:
Pursuant 	to Public 	Employment Relations 	Board 	(PERB) 	regulation
section 	32730, 	a complaint will not be 	issued 	in the
above-referenced 	case 	and 	the pending 	charge 	is 	hereby
dismissed because 	it 	fails 	to 	allege 	facts 	sufficient 	to 	state
a prima 	facie violation 	of 	the Educational 	Employment Relations
Act 	(EERA).1 The 	reasoning which 	underlies 	this 	decision
follows.
On April 25, 	1983, 	Mr. 	Wightman filed an unfair practice charge
against 	the Los Angeles Unified School District 	(LAUSD) 	which
alleged violations of sections 3543.5(a), (b), (c), and (d).
In addition, 	he alleged violations 	of 	"Federal Conspiracy Law -
Code 241 and 242."
His charge states:
"Gentlemen" 	of 	the Los Angeles Unified School
District:
1. 	Mr. 	Srott: 	writes his own name 	(? )
illegibly 	through
1References 	to 	the 	EERA are 	to Government Code 	section
•3540 	et 	seq. 	PERB regulations are 	codified 	at California
Administrative Code, 	Title 8.

Joel Grossman
Jules 	Kimmett
June 29, 1983
Page 	2
interference 	and 	concoction
by letter 	(copy enclosed),
Feb. 	1, 	1983 delivered 	to
me by Mr. 	Simpson at 	the
bus oiling spot.
. ..
--------
2. 	Mr. Prior: 	better 	keep his 	nose 	out of
my affairs 	from attempts 	at
fraudulent (sic) 	letter
delivery 	(to me) 	Feb. 	1 &
March 8, 1983 	at 	the 	B.D.*
3. 	Mr. Simpson: 	has 	been 	incompetently
impersonating 	mailman Feb.
l, 1983 	at 	the 	B.D. 	by 	not
wearing a uniform, 	not
delivering 	to my house, 	and
not 	procuring 	my 	signature
for 	receipt 	(sic) 	of
District 	junk mail.
4. 	Mr. Wessel(?) : 	has 	been guilty of 	the 	same
phoney 	enterprises
mentioned 	above - 	i.e. 	his
inneffective 	(sic)
portrayal as 	"LAUSD
postman", March 8, 	1983
underneath 	the 	(B.D.)
freeway.
*The B.D. 	or Business 	Division 	is 	located 	at
1425 S. 	San Pedro
As explained below, 	such actions, 	without more, 	do not violate
any 	statute 	administered 	by 	the 	Public Employment Relations
Board.
This 	agency 	does 	not 	have 	jurisdiction 	to 	correct 	all
unfairness directed 	towards school employees. 	Instead, 	it 	is
limited 	to 	enforcement 	of 	certain provisions 	of 	the EERA.

Joel Grossman
Jules 	Kimmett
June 29, 1983
Page 3
Specifically, 	section 	3543 	grants 	public 	school 	employees 	the
right to:
form, 	join, 	and participate 	in the
activities of 	employee 	organizations 	of
their 	own 	choosing 	for 	the 	purpose 	of
representation 	on 	all matters 	of
employer-employee 	relations.
Section 	3543.5 	states:
It 	shall 	be unlawful 	for 	a public school
employer 	to:
(a) 	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.
(b) 	Deny to employee organizations 	rights •
guaranteed 	to 	them by this 	chapter.
(c) 	Refuse or 	fail to meet 	and 	negotiate 	in
good 	faith 	with 	an 	exclusive 	representative.
(d) 	Dominate 	or 	interfere 	with 	the
formation 	or 	administration of 	any 	employee
organization, 	or 	contribute 	financial or
other 	support 	to 	it, 	or 	in any way 	encourage
employees 	to 	join 	any organization 	in
preference 	to 	another.
(e) 	Refuse 	to participate 	in good 	faith 	in
the 	impasse procedure 	set forth 	in Article 	9
(commencing with Section 3548).
The 	PERB has 	ruled 	that 	in 	order 	for 	an 	unfair 	practice 	charge
to be correctly stated, 	it must 	allege 	facts 	that 	establish 	a
"nexus", 	or 	connection, 	between an exercise of protected 	rights
and 	the 	employer's 	action. 	(Carlsbad Unified 	School District
(1/30/79) 	PERB Decision No. 	89; 	Novato Unified School District
(4/30/82) 	PERB Decision No. 	210.)

Joel Grossman
Jules Kimmett
June 29, 1983
Page 4
There 	is simply no nexus between writing a name illegibly,
fraudulent letter delivery, 	impersonating a mailman, 	and
ineffective portrayal as 	"LAUSD Postman" 	and rights guaranteed
by the EERA. 	Nor 	have facts been presented to demonstrate that
the complained of conduct constitutes 	adverse 	employer 	action.
Pursuant 	to Public Employment Relations Board 	regulation
section 32635 	(California Administrative Code, 	title 8,
part III), you may appeal the refusal to issue a complaint
(dismissal) 	to the Board itself.
Right to Appeal
You may obtain a review of this dismissal of the charge by
filing an appeal 	to the Board 	itself within twenty 	(20)
calendar days after 	service of 	this dismissal 	(section
32635(a)). 	To be timely filed, the original and five 	(5)
copies of 	such appeal must be actually received by the Board
itself before the close of business 	(5:00 p.m.) 	on July 20,
1983, or sent by telegraph or certified United States mail
postmarked not later than July 20, 1983 	(section 32135). 	The
Board's address is:
Public Employment Relations Board
1031 18th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
If you file a timely appeal of the refusal to 	issue a
complaint, 	any other party may file with the Board an original
and five 	(5) 	copies of a statement in opposition within twenty
(20) 	calendar days following 	the date of service of 	the appeal
(section 32635(b)).
Service
All documents 	authorized 	to be filed herein must also be
"served" upon all parties to the proceeding, 	and a "proof of
service" must accompany the document filed with the Board
itself 	(see section 32140 for 	the required contents and a
sample form). 	The document will be considered properly
"served" 	when personally delivered or deposited 	in the
first-class mail postage paid and 	properly addressed.

Joel Grossman
Jules Kimmett
June 29, 1983
Page 5
Extension of Time
A request 	for an extension of time in which to file a document
with the Board 	itself must be 	in writing 	and filed with the
Board at the previously noted address. 	A request for an
extension must be filed at least three 	(3) 	calendar days before
the expiration of the time required for 	filing the document.
The request must indicate good cause for and, 	if known, the
position of each other party regarding 	the extension, 	and shall
be accompanied by proof of 	service of 	the request upon each
party (section 32132).
Final Date
If no appeal is filed within the specified time limits, the
dismissal will become final when the 	time limits have expired.
Very truly yours,
DENNIS M	DENN-:ES--MDennis M. SULLIVAN
General Counsel
By Robert 	Kingsley	Kingsley
Attorney
cc: 	Victor Wightman