Oakland Unified School District (PERB 0178EA)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
OAKLAND SCHOOL 	EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION,
Charging 	Party,
PETITIONER
v.
OAKLAND 	UNIFIED SCHOOL 	DISTRICT,
Respondent.
)
)
) 	Case No. 	SF-CE-321
Request 	for 	Reconsideration
PERB 	Decision No. 	178
PERB 	Decision No. 	178a
February 	22, 	1982
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
--------~-)
l\.p~earances: 	Andrew Thomas 	Sinclair, 	Attorney 	for 	Oakland
School Employees 	Association; 	Yvonne 	Garcia, 	Legal Advisor 	and
Sharon D. 	Banks, 	Legal Assistant 	for 	the 	Oakland Unified School
District.
Before 	Gluck, 	Chairperson; 	Moore 	and 	Tovar, 	Members.
DECISION
The 	Oakland 	School Employees Association 	(Association)
seeks 	reconsideration 	of 	the 	Public Employment 	Relations 	Board's
(PERB 	or 	Board) 	Decision 	No. 	178 	in 	which we 	held 	that 	the
Oakland Unified 	School District 	(District) 	did 	not 	refuse 	to
negotiate 	in 	good 	faith 	on 	the 	Association's 	layoff-related
proposal. 	The 	basis 	of 	this 	request 	is 	a 	claim 	that 	the 	Board
did 	not 	consider 	the 	District's 	conduct 	which 	was 	the 	subject
of 	other 	unfair 	practice 	charges 	which 	had 	been 	withdrawn, 	but
which 	were 	germane 	to 	the 	charge 	on 	appeal.
In 	deciding 	the 	underlying 	case, 	the 	Board 	did 	consider,
inter 	alia, 	the 	totality 	of 	the 	employer's 	negotiating 	conduct,

including
	the 	evidence
	that
	the
	District
	conditioned
	its
participation
	in
	mediation
	on
	the
	Association's
	withdrawing
certain
	unfair
	practice
	charges
	and
	its
	cancellation
	of
	the
contract
	extension
	in
	retaliation
	against
	the
	Association 	for
having
	filed
	charges.
By
	stipulation
	of
	the
	parties,
	the
	only
	issue 	in
	Decision
No. 	178
	was
	whether
	the
	District
	acted 	unlawfully
	with
	respect
to
	the
	layoff 	proposal.
	Thus,
	while 	the 	mediation
	and
	contract
cancellation 	incidents
	may
	have
	been
	unfair
	practices,
	they
were 	found
	not
	to
	be
	controlling 	in
	the 	face 	of
	other
	evidence
concerning
	the
	District's
	negotiating 	behavior.
	As
	we
	pointed
out
	in
	the 	underlying
	decision,
	the
	District's
	explanation 	of
its
	position
	on
	the 	disputed 	proposal
	was
	"legitimate
	and,
	in
the
	main,
	reasonable."
	When
	considered 	together
	with 	the
	fact
that
	agreement
	had
	been
	reached
	on
	75
	percent
	of
	the
	provisions
for
	a 	new
	contract
	before 	the
	layoff 	proposal
	was
	made,
	the
Board 	found
	no
	basis 	for
	upholding 	the 	charge.
ORDER
Having
	shown 	no
	"extraordinary 	circumstances" 	within 	the
meaning
	of
	PERB
	rule
	324101, 	the
	Oakland 	School Employees
lpERB
	rules
	and
	regulations 	are 	codified 	at 	CaliforniaAdministrative
	Code,
	title
	8, 	section
	31000
	~! _§_~-
Section
	32410(a)
	states:
Any
	party 	to
	a
	decision 	of 	the 	Board
	itself
may, 	because 	of 	extraordinary 	circumstances,
file
	a
	request 	to 	reconsider 	the 	decision
2

Association's 	request 	for 	reconsideration 	is 	DENIED.
PER CURIAM
with 	the 	Board 	itself within 	10 	days
following 	the 	date 	of 	service 	of 	the
decision. 	The 	request 	for 	reconsideration
shall 	be 	filed 	with 	the 	Executive 	Assistant
to 	the 	Board 	and 	shall 	state with
specificity 	the 	grounds 	claimed 	and, 	where
applicable, 	shall 	specify 	the 	page 	of 	the
record 	relied 	on. 	Service 	and 	proof 	of
service 	of 	the 	request 	pursuant 	to 	Section
32140 	are 	required.
3