Curcio

I.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Board Proceedings.

Curcio filed an unfair practice charge with the board, alleging FTA and its

president breached a duty to represent her under the bargaining agreement between the

district and FTA, when FTA and CTA declined to provide Curcio with an attorney to

pursue her request for complaint letters in her personnel file. She requested the board

order FTA to return the dues she had paid for the past 16 years ($22,000) because she had

been forced to represent herself (with the assistance of colleagues) in her quest to obtain

1 All further statutory references are to the Government Code unless otherwise indicated.

2 the complaint letters. In addition, Curcio prayed for $1.5 million in damages for FTA’s

breach of contract. In her statement of the conduct that gave rise to her claim, Curcio

also alleged CTA breached its duty to represent her. But, she did not name CTA as a

party against whom the charge was directed.

In its response, FTA (through a CTA attorney) argued Curcio’s charge was

untimely filed and cited section 3541.5, subdivision (a)(1), which prohibits the board

from “issuing a complaint regarding an alleged…