A Community College District placed a Director of Technology on paid administrative leave following the discovery of a potential disclosure of confidential information. The Community College District initiated an investigation into the disclosure of confidential information and learned that although he was not responsible for the disclosure of the information, he had failed to do his job in other respects. This included a failure to adequately supervise one of his subordinates, and a failure to timely respond to a large-scale scale cyberthreat. The District engaged in proposing discipline as a result.
In this case, the employee filed an unfair practice charge at PERB, alleging that the placement on paid administrative leave and the proposed discipline was retaliation and discrimination for engaging in protected activity under the Educational Employment Relations Act (EERA).
Attorney Rivas argued in the District’s position statement that PERB did not have jurisdiction over the claims raised by the employee, as he was not alleging retaliation or discrimination of a protected activity relating to participation in collective bargaining. Further, she argued the Community College District acted based on legitimate reasons in placing the employee on paid administrative leave and recommending discipline. PERB agreed the employee failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation and discrimination, as well as raised allegations that were untimely. As such, PERB dismissed the Unfair Practice Charge in its entirety.