Service Employees International Union, Local 99 (Cooke) (PERB 1306EA)

STATE 	OP 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF 	THE
PUBLIC 	EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
JOSE ANTONIO 	COOKE,
Charging Party,
v.
SERVICE 	EMPLOYEES 	INTERNATIONAL
UNION, 	LOCAL 99,
Respondent.
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-CO-778
Request 	for Reconsideration
PERB Decision No. 	1306
PERB Decision No. 	1306a
March 24, 	1999
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearance: 	Jose Antonio Cooke, 	on his 	own behalf.
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
Jose Antonio Cooke 	(Cooke) 	that 	the Board 	reconsider 	its 	decision
in Service Employees 	International Union. 	Local 	99 	(Cooke) 	(1999)
PERB Decision No. 	1306. 	In that decision, 	the Board dismissed
Cooke's 	unfair practice 	charge which alleged that 	the 	Service
Employees 	International Union, 	Local 	99 	breached the duty of 	fair
representation 	guaranteed by 	the 	Educational 	Employment 	Relations
Act 	(EERA)1 by 	failing to represent 	him in his 	civil 	action
against 	the 	Los Angeles Unified School 	District 	(District) 	and 	in
District 	Personnel 	Commission proceedings.
1EERA is 	codified at Government 	Code 	section 3540 	et 	seq.

DISCUSSION
PERB Regulation 324102 permits 	any party to a decision of
the 	Board 	itself 	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.
The 	Board has 	strictly applied 	these 	limited grounds 	in
considering 	reconsideration 	requests 	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 Order
No. 	Ad-187a.) 	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)
2PERB 	regulations 	are 	codified at 	California 	Code 	of
Regulations, 	title 	8, 	section 31001 	et 	seq. 	A revision to PERB
Regulation 32410 became effective on February 7, 	1999, 	subsequent
to 	the 	filing 	of 	this 	request 	for reconsideration. 	The 	revision
has 	no bearing 	on the Board's 	consideration of 	this 	request.
22

(1988) 	PERB Decision No. 	692a-H; 	Tustin Unified School District
(1987) 	PERB Decision No. 	626a; 	Riverside Unified School District
(1987) 	PERB Decision No. 	622a.)
On February 3, 	1999, 	Cooke 	filed the 	instant 	request 	for
reconsideration. 	However, 	Cooke makes no assertions 	that 	the
Board's 	decision contains prejudicial 	errors of 	fact, 	or that he
has 	found newly discovered evidence 	or law. 	(Regents 	of 	the
University of 	California 	(1998) 	PERB Decision No. 	1271-H at
p. 	3.) 	Therefore, 	Cooke's request 	fails 	to demonstrate grounds
for 	reconsideration 	sufficient 	to 	comply with 	PERB 	Regulation
32410.
ORDER
The 	request 	for reconsideration 	in Service 	Employees
International Union. 	Local 99 	(Cooke) 	(1999) 	PERB Decision
No. 	1306 	is hereby DENIED.
Members 	Dyer and Amador 	joined 	in this 	Decision.
3
-------
3