A bus driver had a physical altercation with a passenger. The transit district reviewed the relevant video footage and also observed the employee using his cell phone and drinking a beverage while operating the bus. The transit district terminated the driver’s employment. The bus driver filed an unfair practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). The charge alleged unlawful termination, denial of Weingarten rights, failure to provide requested information to the driver’s union representative, unlawful surveillance, retaliation and discrimination, and violations related to protected leave.
The case ultimately turned on a jurisdictional issue. Although PERB assigned the matter a case number under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (MMBA), and had previously exercised jurisdiction over the transit district in another matter that had resulted in a published decision, further research revealed that PERB lacked jurisdiction over the charge. Instead, the transit district was governed by its own labor relations statute under the Public Utilities Code, which limits PERB’s jurisdiction to the processing of representation petitions.
LCW’s position statement explained why PERB lacked jurisdiction. PERB issued a Notice of Case Number Change, changing the designation from “M” to “X,” and dismissed the charge later that week.