Compton Community College District (PERB 0704E)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS 	BOARD
COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE 	FEDERATION
OF EMPLOYEES, 	LOCAL 3486,
Charging 	Party,
v.
COMPTON COMMUNITY COLLEGE 	DISTRICT,
Respondent.
)
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-CE-2 630
PERB 	Decision No. 	704
November 22 	1983
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	Lawrence 	Rosenzweig, 	Attorney for Compton Community
College Federation of Employees, 	Local 	3486; 	Jones & Matson by
Urrea C. 	Jones, 	Jr., 	for Compton Community College District.
Before Hesse, 	Chairperson; 	Porter and Craib, 	Members.
DECISION
CRAIB, 	Member: 	This case is before the Public Employment
Relations 	Board 	(PERB or Board) 	on appeal 	by the 	charging party,
Compton Community College 	Federation of 	Employees, 	Local 	3486
(Federation), 	of a Board agent's partial dismissal of its charge
that 	the 	Compton Community College 	District 	(District) 	violated
sections 3543.5(a), 	(b), 	(c) and (d) of the Educational
Employment Relations Act 	(EERA).1 As discussed below, 	we 	find
that the 	Federation has withdrawn the 	entire 	charge, 	including
that portion which is 	the 	subject of 	the present 	appeal.
The 	EERA is 	codified at Government Code 	section 	3540, 	et
seq.

First, 	we take official notice2 of a Notice of Withdrawal,
dated June 	22, 	1988 	and 	signed by the Federation's 	attorney. 	The
withdrawal was 	submitted to the 	Board's 	regional 	office 	in
Los Angeles, 	where the 	administrative 	law judge who was 	assigned
to 	the 	portion of 	the 	charge 	on which a 	complaint had 	issued 	is
located. 	The withdrawal, 	on its 	face, 	purports to withdraw with
prejudice the charge in Case No. 	LA-CE-2630. 	There is no
differentiation 	between 	that 	portion of 	the 	charge which had 	gone
to 	complaint 	and that portion which 	is 	the 	subject 	of 	the present
appeal.
By letter of October 	18, 	1988, 	the Board's executive
director 	provided 	the 	charging 	party 	an 	opportunity 	to 	submit
written 	argument 	on why 	the 	Notice 	of 	Withdrawal 	should not 	be
considered as 	applying to the entire 	case. 	The 	Federation has
not 	responded within 	the 	time 	period provided. 	Accordingly,
given the 	clear and unambiguous 	language 	of the 	June 	22, 	1988
Notice 	of Withdrawal, 	as well 	as 	the Federation's 	failure to
respond 	to 	an 	invitation 	to 	submit 	argument 	that 	the withdrawal
was 	not 	intended to have 	any effect upon the 	appeal 	of 	the
partial 	dismissal, 	we will dismiss 	the matter now before us.3
2PERB may take 	official 	notice 	of 	documents 	in 	its 	records
and 	files. 	(John Swett 	Unified School 	District 	(1981) 	PERB
Decision No. 	188; 	Antelope Valley Community College District
(1979) 	PERB Decision No. 	97.)
That	'rhat 	portion of 	the 	charge 	on which a 	complaint 	issued was
dismissed by 	the 	assigned 	administrative 	law 	judge 	by 	order 	dated
June 23, 	1988.
22
•

ORDER
The unfair practice charge 	in Case No. 	LA-CE-2630 	is hereby
DISMISSED WITH 	PREJUDICE.
Chairperson Hesse 	and Member Porter 	joined 	in this 	Decision.
33