Poway Unified School District (PERB A306EA)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
POWAY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
POWAY COUNCIL OF CLASSIFIED
EMPLOYEES, CFT/AFT, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner,
and
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION AND ITS POWAY
CHAPTER 80,
Exclusive Representative.
Case No. LA-DP-333-E
Request for Reconsideration
PERB Order No. Ad-306
PERB Order No. Ad-306a
March 5, 2001
Appearances: California School Employees Association by David J. Dolloff, Attorney, for
California School Employees Association and its Poway Chapter 80; Van Bourg, Weinberg,
Roger & Rosenfeld by Stewart Weinberg, Attorney, for Poway Council of Classified
Employees, CFT/AFT, AFL-CIO.
Before Amador, Baker and Whitehead, Members.
DECISION
AMADOR, Member: This case comes before the Public Employment Relations Board
(PERB or Board) on a request by the California School Employees Association and its Poway
Chapter 80 (CSEA) that the Board grant reconsideration of Poway Unified School District
(2000) PERB Order No. Ad-306 (Poway USD). In Poway USD, the Board affirmed an
administrative determination which found that the objections filed by the Poway Council of

________________________
Classified Employees, CFT/AFT, AFL-CIO concerning serious irregularities in the conduct of
a decertification election warranted setting aside the election results. The Board also ordered a
new election.
After reviewing the entire record, the Board hereby denies the request for
reconsideration.
DISCUSSION
Reconsideration requests are governed by PERB Regulation 32410.1 PERB Regulation
32410(a) states:
(a) Any party to a decision of the Board itself may, because of
extraordinary circumstances, file a request to reconsider the
decision within 20 days following the date of service of the
decision. . . . The grounds for requesting reconsideration are
limited to claims that: (1) the decision of the Board itself
contains prejudicial errors of fact, or (2) the party has newly
discovered evidence which was not previously available and
could not have been discovered with the exercise of reasonable
diligence. A request for reconsideration based upon the
discovery of new evidence must be supported by a declaration
under the penalty of perjury which establishes that the evidence:
(1) was not previously available; (2) could not have been
discovered prior to the hearing with the exercise of reasonable
diligence; (3) was submitted within a reasonable time of its
discovery; (4) is relevant to the issues sought to be reconsidered;
and (5) impacts or alters the decision of the previously decided
case.
CSEA now seeks reconsideration of the Board's decision in Poway USD based on a
claim that the decision "affirmed without comment the underlying administrative
determination which contains two critical, prejudicial errors of fact." In reviewing Poway
USD, the Board considered these identical allegations and adopted the hearing officer's
determination that "the only reasonable conclusion is that the totality of circumstances
1 PERB regulations are codified at California Code of Regulations, title 8, section
31001 et al.
2

surrounding the three ballot counts establishes that serious irregularities occurred in the
conduct of the election which had a probable or actual impact upon the election results." (Id.
at p. 14.)
Understandably, CSEA disagrees with the Board's ruling in Poway USD. However, its
request for reconsideration is little more than a vehement restatement of the arguments raised
earlier in its appeal. In reviewing requests for reconsideration, the Board has strictly applied
the limited grounds included in the regulation, specifically to avoid the use of the
reconsideration process to reargue or relitigate issues which have already been decided.
(Redwoods Community College District (1994) PERB Decision No. 1047a; State of California
(Department of Corrections) (1995) PERB Decision No. 1100a-S; Fall River Joint Unified
School District (1998) PERB Decision No. 1259a.) In numerous request for reconsideration
cases, the Board has declined to reconsider matters previously offered by the parties and
rejected in the underlying decision. (California State University (1995) PERB Decision
No. 1093a-H; California State Employees Association, Local 1000 (Janowicz) (1994) PERB
Decision No. 1043a-S; California Faculty Association (Wang) (1988) PERB Decision
No. 692a-H; Tustin Unified School District (1987) PERB Decision No. 626a; Riverside
Unified School District (1987) PERB Decision No. 622a.)
Based on this precedent, we decline to reconsider the matters previously considered in
Poway USD.
3

ORDER
California School Employees Association and its Poway Chapter 80's request for
reconsideration of the Board's decision in Poway Unified School District (2000) PERB Order
No. Ad-306 is hereby DENIED.
Members Baker and Whitehead joined in this Decision.
4