D.U.P. NO. 79-18

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF REPRESENTATION

In the Matter of

CAMDEN COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN

FREEHOLDERS [LAKELAND HOSPITAL],

Respondent,

-and-	Docket No. CO-78-31

LICENSED PRACTICAL NURSE

ASSOCIATION OF NEW JERSEY, INC.,

Charging Party.

Appearances:

For the Respondent

Vincent J. Paglione, Assistant County Counsel

For the Charging Party

Craner & Nelson, Esqs.

(John A. Craner, of Counsel)

REFUSAL TO ISSUE COMPLAINT

An Unfair Practice Charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations Commission (the "Commission") on August 15, 1977 by the Licensed Practical Nurse Association of New Jersey, Inc. (the "Charging Party") against the Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders [Lakeland Hospital] (the "Respondent") alleging that the Respondent was engaging in unfair practices within the meaning of the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, N.J.S.A. 34:13A-1 et seq. (the "Act"), specifically N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4(a)(1), (3) and (7).1/

Charging Party alleges that the Respondent's continuing practice of checking off dues deductions to Civil Service Association, Council #10 ("Council #10") from the pay checks of individual employees constitutes an unfair practice inasmuch as the Charging Party, through a Commission conducted election, replaced Council #10 as the exclusive majority representative of unit employees. The Charging Party contends that the election "terminated all rights of Council #10 to represent the employees involved including the check off of dues and that it was the intent of the Legislature under N.J.S.A. 52:14-15.9(e) to permit withdrawals from check off in January and July of each year only as to a bona fide certified collective bargaining representative."

N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4(c) sets forth in pertinent part that the Commission shall have the power to prevent anyone from engaging in any unfair practice, and that it has the authority to issue a complaint stating the unfair practice charge.2/ The Commission has delegated its authority to issue complaints to the undersigned and has established a standard upon which an unfair practice complaint may be issued. This standard provides that a complaint shall issue if it appears that the allegations of the charging party, if true, may constitute an unfair practice within the meaning of the Act.3/ The Commission's rules provide that the undersigned may decline to issue a complaint.4/

For the reasons stated below the undersigned has determined that the Commission's complaint issuance standards have not been met.

N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.3 provides that individual public employees may assist any employee representative. This right extends to the support of a minority organization notwithstanding the existence of a collectively chosen majority representative of employees. N.J.S.A. 52:14-15.9(e) provides a method for an individual to exercise this protected right by setting forth a procedure for dues deduction through payroll deduction by the public employer. This statute provides a specific procedure for authorizing and implementing dues deduction. In relevant part, the procedure provides that only the individual may authorize a deduction of dues and a withdrawal of such authorization. The individual effectuates this procedure by preparing his or her request in accordance with the statutory prescription and by submitting the request to the employer's disbursing officer.5/ An employer violates the law when it fails to comply with the specific desire of the individual public employee when properly exercised in accordance with the statutory procedure, unless, after December 12, 1977, the employer is a party to a "collectively negotiated written agreement which provides that employees included in the negotiating unit may only request deduction for the payment of dues to the duly certified majority representative." [n.5, supra].

The Charging Party herein argues that the vote of a majority of unit members in a secret ballot Commission election which resulted in the "selection of Charging Party as the majority representative and which rejected the continued majority status of Council #10," terminated council #10's rights to the individual's dues deductions. However, Charging Party does not assert that it is a party with the County to a collective negotiations agreement which provides, under the statutory amendment to N.J.S.A. 52:14-15.9(e),6/ that individuals may only have the employer deduct dues to the majority representative. Absent such provision, an employer continues to be obligated to deduct dues pursuant to individual authorizations under the procedure set forth in N.J.S.A. 52:14-15.9(e).

Accordingly, the undersigned refuses to issue a Complaint herein.

BY ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR

OF UNFAIR PRACTICES

/s/Carl Kurtzman, Director

DATED:	January 30, 1979

Trenton, New Jersey