United Faculty Association of North Orange County Community College District (Kiszely) (PERB 1269EA)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
ELIZABETH 	KISZELY,
Charging 	Party,
v.
UNITED 	FACULTY ASSOCIATION OF
NORTH ORANGE 	COUNTY COMMUNITY
COLLEGE 	DISTRICT,
Respondent.
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-CO-714
Request 	for Reconsideration
PERB Decision No. 	1269
PERB Decision No. 	1269a
August 14, 	1998
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	Elizabeth Kiszely, 	on her own behalf; 	California
Teachers Association by Rosalind D. 	Wolf, 	Attorney, 	for United
Faculty Association 	of 	North 	Orange 	County 	Community 	College
District.
Before Caffrey, 	Chairman; 	Dyer and Amador, 	Members.
DECISION
CAFFREY, 	Chairman: 	This 	case 	is before the Public
Employment 	Relations 	Board 	(PERB 	or Board) 	on a 	request 	by
Elizabeth Kiszely 	(Kiszely) 	that 	the Board 	reconsider 	its
decision 	in United 	Faculty Association 	of 	North 	Orange 	County
Community College District 	(Kiszely) 	(1998) 	PERB Decision
No. 	1269. 	In that 	case, 	the Board dismissed Kiszely's charge
that 	the 	United 	Faculty Association 	of 	North Orange 	County
Community 	College 	District 	violated 	the 	Educational 	Employment
Relations Act 	(EERA)1 by denying her the 	right 	to 	fair
representation.
1EERA is 	codified at Government 	Code 	section 3 540 	et 	seq.

DISCUSSION
PERB Regulation 32410(a)2 permits 	any party to a decision of
the Board itself, 	"because of 	extraordinary circumstances," 	to
request 	the Board to reconsider that decision. 	It 	states, 	in
pertinent 	part:
The 	grounds 	for 	requesting 	reconsideration
are 	limited to 	claims 	that 	the decision of
the Board 	itself 	contains 	prejudicial 	errors
of 	fact, 	or newly discovered evidence 	or law
which was 	not 	previously available 	and 	could
not 	have been discovered with 	the 	exercise 	of
reasonable 	diligence.
In 	considering 	requests 	for reconsideration, 	the Board has
strictly 	applied 	the 	limited 	grounds 	included 	in 	PERB
Regulation 32410 	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. 	ll00a-S.) 	Similarly,
reconsideration will 	not 	be 	granted based 	on a 	claim of 	an
alleged prejudicial 	error 	of 	law. 	(Jamestown Elementary School
District 	(1989) 	PERB Decision No. 	Ad-187a.) 	In numerous 	requests
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.
2PERB 	regulations are 	codified at 	California Code 	of
Regulations, 	title 8, 	section 31001 et seq.
22

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.)
Kiszely 	filed 	the 	instant 	request 	for 	reconsideration 	of 	the
Board's 	decision 	in United 	Faculty Association 	of 	North 	Orange
County Community College District 	(Kiszely), 	supra. 	PERB Decision
No. 	1269 	on July 13, 	1998. 	Kiszely's 	request refers primarily to
matters 	previously 	considered 	in 	the underlying decision, 	and
does 	not 	demonstrate 	that 	the 	Board's 	decision 	contains
prejudicial 	errors 	of 	fact. 	The 	request presents 	no new evidence
which 	could not 	have 	been discovered with 	the 	exercise 	of
reasonable diligence. 	Consequently, 	Kiszely's 	request 	for
reconsideration 	does 	not 	describe 	extraordinary 	circumstances 	and
fails 	to 	demonstrate 	grounds 	sufficient 	to 	comply with 	PERB
Regulation 32410.
ORDER
The 	request 	for 	reconsideration 	in United 	Faculty
Association 	of 	North 	Orange 	County 	Community College 	District
(Kiszely) 	(1998) 	PERB Decision No. 	1269 	is hereby DENIED.
Members 	Dyer and Amador 	joined 	in 	the Decision.
33