D.R. NO. 87-30 1.
D.R. NO. 87-30
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF REPRESENTATION
In the Matter of
MIDDLESEX COUNTY,
Public Employer,
-and
AFSCME, COUNCIL 73, Docket No. RO-87-150
Petitioner.
-and
MIDDLESEX COUNCIL 7, NJCSA,
Intervenor.
Appearances:
For the Public Employer
Hoagland, Longo, Oropollo & Moran, Esqs.
(John J. Hoagland, of counsel)
For the Petitioner
Jack Merkel, Executive Director
For the Intervenor
Borrus, Goldin, Foley, Vignuolo,
Hyman & Stahl, Esqs.
(James F. Clarkin, III, of counsel)
DECISION
On May 15, 1987, AFSCME, Council 73 ("Council 73") filed a Petition seeking certification of all blue and white collar employees, including supervisors, employed by Middlesex County ("County"). On May 19, 1987, a Commission agent scheduled an informal investigatory conference for June 3, 1987.
On May 26, 1987, Middlesex Council 7, NJCSA, ("Council 7") submitted a letter and a copy of an executed collective negotiations agreement between Council 7 and the County of Middlesex covering employees sought to be represented by Council 73. By its letter, Council 7 perfected a request to intervene in this matter and raised a contract bar to the processing of Council 73's petition. 1/
On May 27, 1987, I wrote a letter to Council 73 advising it that Council 7 had perfected its request to intervene and had raised contract bar to the processing of Council 73's petition. I advised Council 73 that I was inclined to dismiss its petition because it was not filed within the time frame provided by N.J.A.C. 19:11-2.8. I invited Council 73 to file a position statement and any supporting documentation it desired on the issue of the appropriateness of its petition. I informed Council 73 that, absent a showing of compelling reasons to the contrary, I would dismiss its petition as untimely pursuant to N.J.A.C. 19:11-2.8.
On June 3, 1987, Council 73 submitted a letter in which it asserts that the current contract between Council 7 and the County should not bar the processing of its representation petition. Council 73 claims that the County and Council 7 are colluding to reach a successor collective negotiations agreement prior to the expiration date of the existing agreement in order to avoid a
1/ On May 28, 1987, the County of Middlesex submitted a letter and also raised a contract bar to the processing of Council 73's petition.
representation election. Council 73 also claims that the ratification procedure for a proposed successor agreement was "badly flawed."
On June 5, 1987, Council 7 submitted a letter urging the dismissal of the petition. As Council 7 correctly points out, the issues raised by Council 73's allegations are not relevant to the adequacy of its petition. N.J.A.C. 19:11-2.8(c)(2) is explicit:
(c) During the period of an existing written agreement containing substantive terms and conditions of employment and having a term of three years or less, a petition for certification of public employee representative...normally will not be considered timely filed unless:
2. In a case involving employees of a county or municipality.... The petition is filed not less than 90 days and not more than 120 days before the expiration or renewal date of such agreement;
Council 73's petition is untimely and is therefore dismissed.
BY ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR
OF REPRESENTATION
Edmund G. Gerber, Director
DATED: June 9, 1987
Trenton, New Jersey ***** End of DR 87-30 ***** |