How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask socrateaser Your Own Question
socrateaser
socrateaser, Lawyer
Category: California Employment Law
Satisfied Customers: 38910
Experience:  Retired (mostly)
10097515
Type Your California Employment Law Question Here...
socrateaser is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Thank you for your last answer as it was quite helpful. A new quest

This answer was rated:

Thank you for your last answer as it was quite helpful.

A new question: Within the State of California, I am looking for court cases that correlate arbitrary methods of evaluation for continued employment with violations of fair practice or good faith and fair dealing.
Hello,

I am an expert in the justanswer.com California Employment Law category. Please permit me to assist.

In general, University of California instructor employment decisions are controlled by the university's administrative grievance process, in concert with any collective bargaining agreements between union-member instructors and the university. Judicial review is limited to evaluating the fairness of the administrative hearing process -- not the correctness of any decision. See, e.g., Code Civ. Pro. 1094.5; Pomona College v. Sup.Ct. (Corin) (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 1716, 1726, 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 662, 668; Gutkin v. University of So. Calif. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 967, 976-977,125 Cal.Rptr.2d 115, 122-123.

The UC grievance process can be found at this link.

Note: I must respectfully XXXXX XXXXX my colleagues prior answers to you, to the extent that it may suggest some claim based upon a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. First, there is a substantial difference between fair "process" and fair "dealing." The first relates to a due process of law hearing requirement which is imposed on organizations that operate as an arm of government -- such as the UC university system. The other relates to contracts between private individuals. The cases that I provided above discuss due process issues within the scope of your query. And, while you could conceivably apply a breach of covenant of good faith contract theory to the failure of a UC employer to follow its own grievance process, the fact is that the case law does not recognize the concept, preferring instead to deal with the matter as a due process of law issue.

Further note: If you believe you are disserved by any answer provided in this forum (including mine), you are welcome to seek a refund from Justanswer for the incorrect answer received.

Hope this helps.


And, if you need to contact me again, please put my user id on the title line of your question (“ToCustomerrdquo;), and the system will send me an alert. Thanks!

socrateaser and other California Employment Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 6 years ago.

HelloCustomer

I have the $35 per month policy that allows me to ask many questions without any additional cost. Will you be paid when I click accept answer?

I appreciate the clarity of your answer which allows me to refine my question. I do not have an issue with the CSU system grievance process itself. I am preparing to grieve my evaluation because the evaluation forms used are vague and ambiguous, allowing for biases and rumors to be written into my evaluations. Are there any court cases that show that arbitrary or capricious evaluations violation fairness of the administrative hearing process or due process of law?

I am interested in collecting data and am not bothered by differences of opinion or viewpoint of law

Re your subscription, I am provided with no information concerning customer account status or agreements. I "justanswer" the questions, and I am paid when you click Accept -- otherwise not. If you have questions re your account, please contact customer service. That said, of course, I would love it were you to repeatedly click Accept! Cool But, I cannot tell you how you will be charged, should you choose to do so.

That said, my answer above is not really a difference of opinion -- the case law absolutely forecloses the use of the covenant of good faith as a legal theory to overturn an administrative ruling by a quasi-government agency in California. Anyway, re cases on arbitary and capricious administrativer rulings:

  • San Francisco Fire Fighters Local 798 v. City and County of San Francisco, 38 Cal. 4th 653 (Cal. 2006)
  • State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners v. Superior Court, 45 Cal. 4th 963 (Cal. 2009)
  • Miklosy v. Regents of University of California, 44 Cal. 4th 876 (Cal. 2008)
  • Zuckerman v. State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners, 29 Cal. 4th 32 (Cal. 2002)

That should give you something to work with.

Hope this helps.


And, if you need to contact me again, please put my user id on the title line of your question (“ToCustomerrdquo;), and the system will send me an alert. Thanks!

Customer: replied 6 years ago.
HelloCustomer

I have gone to the law library and am studying the above referenced case concerning Pomona College. Can I correlate "fair trial" in Pomona case with my circumstance of arbitrary and vague evaluation forms, evaluations by individual biased against me and arbitrary standards to meet for continuation employment? I have a three year con tract that is automatically renewed unless the department can demonstrate incompetence.
You can make that correlation, in my opinion. If you can show that the evidence provided throughout the evaluation process is not objective or fair, then that would taint any hearing process, because the decision makers would be dealing with evidence that is defective, and that makes the hearing process itself and the determination arbitrary and capricious, because without fair and objective evidence, any decision is arbitrary by definition.

Hope this helps.


And, if you need to contact me again, please put my user id on the title line of your question (“ToCustomerrdquo;), and the system will send me an alert. Thanks!


socrateaser and other California Employment Law Specialists are ready to help you
Customer: replied 5 years ago.
Hello Customer

I have been talking with Union officials and their position is that since there is a final step of arbitration, any fault in the evaluation system can be corrected at that time. Arbitration may take 2-3 years and I would be unemployed for that period. I am looking for legal president that would allow me to help change that portion of an evaluation that is arbitrary, i.e., I wish to change the process so that it does not happen again.

Sabra

Adler v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. (1979) 98 Cal. App. 3d 280.
Forrest v. Trs. of Cal. State Univ. & Colleges (1984) 160 Cal. App. 3d 357
Anderson v. California Faculty Assn. (1994) 25 Cal. App. 4th 207

The Anderson case seems most closely related to your issue, principally because it suggests a potential claim against the union for failing to fairly assist you with your grievance. The idea that you must wait 2-3 years for a disposition of your circumstance, and that the union somehow concurs in this position, is absurd (and, may be bad faith on the union's part).

Hope this helps.


And, if you need to contact me again, please put my user id on the title line of your question (“ToCustomerrdquo;), and the system will send me an alert. Thanks!


Related California Employment Law Questions