Decision 2674Mb – Orange County Employees Association (Hamilton)
LA-CO-215-M
Decision Date: May 28, 2020
Decision Type: PERB Decision
Description: Petitioner, attempting to cure the defects of her first request for reconsideration, submits newly discovered evidence which she claims warrants the Board’s reconsideration of PERB Decision No. 2674-M, in which the Board concluded she was not entitled to payment of attorney fees as damages for OCEA’s violation of its duty of fair representation.
Disposition: The Board denied Petitioner’s second request for reconsideration.
Perc Vol: 44
Perc Index: 108
Decision Headnotes
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1107.10000 – Request for Reconsideration
A party may file only one request for reconsideration of a Board decision, except in those cases where a prior request for reconsideration has resulted in the issuance of a completely revised decision. (p. 2.)
1107.10000 – Request for Reconsideration
Under PERB Regulation 32410, a request for reconsideration based upon the discovery of new evidence must be supported by a declaration establishing, among other things, that the evidence impacts or alters the decision of the previously decided case. (p. 4.)
1201.01000 – In General
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1204.01000 – In General
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1204.04000 – Reimbursement of Dues, Fees and Exactions to Employees; Union Liability
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1205.01000 – In General
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1205.04000 – Attorneys Fees and Costs
PERB declined to award attorney fees as damages in a breach of representation case because the employee’s civil complaint involved (1) the same discrimination claims in a grievance that her union failed to file, and (2) additional retaliation claims. (pp. 4-5.) Because both claims were based on the same core set of facts, they were inextricably intertwined and it was impractical or impossible to apportion the attorney’s time spent on each claim. Under these circumstances, the Board ruled it did not further the purposes of the MMBA to require the union to pay the employee’s attorney fees as damages for breaching its duty of fair representation. (pp. 5-6.)
1503.01000 – In General
Under PERB Regulation 32410, a request for reconsideration based upon the discovery of new evidence must be supported by a declaration establishing, among other things, that the evidence impacts or alters the decision of the previously decided case. (p. 4.)
1503.03000 – Regulations Considered (By Number) (Continued)
Under PERB Regulation 32410, a request for reconsideration based upon the discovery of new evidence must be supported by a declaration establishing, among other things, that the evidence impacts or alters the decision of the previously decided case. (p. 4.)