Orange Unified School District (PERB 1436E)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
ORANGE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Charging Party,
V.
ORANGE UNIFIED EDUCATION
ASSOCIATION,
Respondent.
Case Nos. LA-CO-805-E
LA-CO-806-E
PERB Decision No. 	1436
May
	16,
	2001
Appearances: Hill, Farrer & Burrill by James A. Bowles, Attorney, for Orange Unified School
District; Charles R. Gustafson, Attorney, for Orange Unified Education Association.
Before Amador, Baker and Whitehead, Members.
DECISION
BAKER, Member: 	These cases come before the Public Employment Relations Board
(PERB or Board) on exceptions filed by the Orange Unified School District (District) to an
administrative law judge's proposed decision dismissing its two unfair practice charges in Case
Nos. LA-CO-805 and LA-CO-806.
By letter dated March 27, 2001, the District informed the Board that the District and the
Orange Unified Education Association, the parties to the instant unfair practice charges, have
reached a settlement wherein the District agrees to withdraw these charges and request they be
dismissed with prejudice. The March 27, 2001 letter included a copy
of
the settlement
agreement. Specifically, the District agreed, among other items:
To seek dismissal, with prejudice, of the following matters now
pending before the California Public Employment Relations
Board (herein 'PERB'):

i. 	The unfair practice complaint entitled Orange Unified
School District, et al. v. Orange Unified Education Association,
et al., Case No. LA-CO-805;
ii. 	The unfair practice complaint entitled Orange Unified
School District, et al. v. Orange Unified Education Association,
et al., Case No. LA-CO-806.
After reviewing the settlement agreement and the entire record in this matter, the Board
finds that granting the District's request is in the best interest of the parties and is consistent
with the purposes of the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA). 1
DISCUSSION
When parties are successful in settling a dispute that formed the basis for an unfair
practice charge before PERB, it is often presented with a request to withdraw a case that has
reached the Board itself. The Board reviews each such request to determine whether granting
it will effectuate the purposes of the EERA.
Where, as here, exceptions have been filed to a proposed decision, the Board is guided
by PERB Regulation 32320,2 which provides, in pertinent part:
(a) The Board itself may:
( 1) Issue a decision based upon the record of hearing, or
(2) Affirm, modify or reverse the proposed decision, order the
record re-opened for the taking of further evidence, or take such
other action as it considers proper.
It is clear that the Board has the discretion to grant or deny the request and to allow the
withdrawal of a charge and complaint, and to vacate a proposed decision. (ABC Unified
School District (1990) PERB Decision No. 831 b.)
1 EERA is codified at Government Code section 3540 et seq.
2 PERB regulations are codified at California Code of Regulations, title 8,
section 31001 et seq.
2

In this case, the parties have entered into and provided the Board with a copy of a
settlement agreement which very clearly indicates the parties have settled their disputes which
formed the basis of the instant unfair practice charges. The Board concludes it effectuates the
purposes of EERA to dismiss the instant unfair practice charges, dismiss the complaints and
vacate the proposed decision.
ORDER
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the unfair practice charges in Case
Nos. LA-CO-805-E and LA-CO-806-E are WITHDRAWN WITH PREJUDICE; the
complaints in Case Nos. LA-CO-805-E and LA-CO-806-E are DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE; and the proposed decision in Case Nos. LA-CO-805-E and LA-CO-806-E issued
on August 1, 2000 is VACATED.
Members Amador and Whitehead joined in this Decision.
3