The District Retained All Rights EXCEPT As Provided by Agreement or by Law

Why is Judge Ahler
allowed to continue
deciding cases?

Apparently chief
administrative judge Ron
Diedrich believes Judge
Ahler is not significantly
worse than many of the
other judges at the
Office of Administrative
Hearings.

It is ludicrous that
people like Ron Diedrich
and James Ahler are
allowed to determine
whether other people
lose their jobs.

How does the Office of
Administrative Hearings
get away with blatantly
illegal decisions? Are
Americans willing to
work to defend the rule
of law?

Illegal OAH Decision
Page 25

THE COMMISSION MISCONSTRUED
EMPLOYEE RIGHTS

The Agreement provides teachers with rights regarding Employee
Discipline, Safety, and Transfer which the District violated.

Also, the California Ed Code and other laws provide for employee
rights.

The COMMISSION’s decision violates Petitioner’s substantive
rights conferred by another agency, and violates constitutional
rights and rights under state law and the contract.

California law forbids retaliatory discharge when an employee
files a PERB charge.

The COMMISSION misconstrued Article 5 of the Collective
Bargaining Agreement.

The COMMISSION found in Factual Finding 2: “…Article 5.1 of the
DISTRICT/CVEA agreement provided that the DISTRICT retained
ALL rights and authority to direct the work of its employees.” In
making this finding, the COMMISSION ignored the section of
Article 5.1 which states, “In addition, the DISTRICT retains the
right to hire, classify, assign, promote, lay off, terminate and
discipline employees, except as otherwise provided in this
Agreement or by law.” There is a very significant difference
between this article and the COMMISSION’s interpretation.

Again and again in this decision the COMMISSION demonstrated
its belief that the DISTRICT is above the law and the contract. In
her June 9 grievance Mrs. Larkins enumerated some laws which
had been violated, including freedom of speech and association,
due process, telephone eavesdropping, slander, defamation of
character. The COMMISSION incorrectly construed the law to
mean that the District is not bound by these laws, or, apparently,
any laws at all.

The District and Commission violate Petitioner’s right to defend
herself, to attempt to settle with those who had wronged her, and
to file claims. The District is limited by United States Constitution
and the Constitution and laws of California and the contract.