Back

D.R. No. 83-35

Synopsis:

The Director of Representation, on the basis of an administrative investigation, determines that office aides, who perform routine office duties formerly performed by secretaries, shall be included in the unit of Baord secretaries represented by the Federation. The record revealed that the office aides currently hired by the Board have different duties and responsibilities than office aides who had been previously hired by the Board and were placed in the Association's aides unit. As opposed to all other employees in the aide titles, the new office aides do not have a significant interaction with students and they share common employment conditions with secretaries.

PERC Citation:

D.R. No. 83-35, 9 NJPER 387 (¶14175 1983)

Appellate History:



Additional:



Miscellaneous:



NJPER Index:

33.343

Issues:

    DecisionsWordPerfectPDF
    NJ PERC:.DR 83-035.wpdDR 83-035.pdf - DR 83-035.pdf
    Appellate Division:
    Supreme Court:


    D.R. NO. 83-35 1.
    D.R. NO. 83-35
    STATE OF NEW JERSEY
    PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
    BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF REPRESENTATION

    In the Matter of

    TEANECK BOARD OF EDUCATION,

    Public Employer,

    -and- Docket No. CU-82-52

    TEANECK ASSOCIATION OF EDUCATIONAL
    SECRETARIES, a/w NJSFT, AFT, AFL-CIO,

    Petitioner,

    -and-

    TEANECK AIDES ASSOCIATION, NJEA,

    Intervenor.

    Appearances:

    For the Public Employer
    Murray & Granello, attorneys
    (James P. Granello of counsel)

    For the Petitioner
    Fougeres R. Ferrier, Staff Representative

    For the Intervenor
    Vincent E. Giordano, UniServ Field Representative

    DECISION

    On January 27, 1982, a Petition for Clarification of Unit was filed with the Public Employment Relations Commission ( A Commission @ ) by the Teaneck Association of Educational Secretaries, a/w NJSFT, AFT, AFL-CIO ( A Federation @ ) raising a question concerning the composition of a collective negotiations unit of secretarial/clerical and data processing employees at the Teaneck Board of Education ( A Board @ ) which the Federation represents. The Federation seeks the inclusion of employees in the title of A office aide @ in its negotiations unit. The Teaneck Aides Association, NJEA ( A Association @ ), the majority representative of a unit of all aides and food service personnel employed by the Board, intervened in this matter pursuant to N.J.A.C. 19:11-2.7. The Board and the Association both assert that the title of office aide is included in the Association = s unit and, in fact, has been included in that unit since at least 1976.
    Pursuant to a Notice of Hearing, a hearing was held before Commission Hearing Officer Joan Kane Josephson, on May 12, 1982, in Newark, New Jersey. All parties were afforded the opportunity to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to present evidence and to argue orally. The Hearing Officer submitted her Report and Recommendations on January 17, 1983, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. The Hearing Officer found that the title office aide was newly created and recommended that the Federation = s unit of secretaries, clerical and data processing personnel be clarified to include the office aides. The Association filed exceptions to the Hearing officer = s Report and Recommendations.1/
    The undersigned has carefully considered the entire record herein, including the transcripts, exhibits, the Hearing Officer = s Report and Recommendations, and the exceptions thereto, and finds and determines as follows:
    1. The Teaneck Board of Education is a public employer within the meaning of the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, N.J.S.A. 34:13A-1 et seq. ( A Act @ ), is the employer of the employees who are functioning in the job titles which are the subject of this Petition and is subject to the provisions of the Act.
    2. The Teaneck Association of Educational Secretaries, a/w NJSFT, AFT, AFL-CIO and Teaneck Aides Association, NJEA, are employee representatives within the meaning of the Act and are subject to its provisions.
    The Federation is currently the exclusive representative of secretarial, clerical and data processing personnel employed by the Board. The Association is currently the exclusive representative of aides and food service personnel employed by the Board.
    3. The Federation seeks a determination that certain office aide employees hired beginning with the 1981-82 school year are included in its negotiations unit. The Board and the Association opposed the Petition, arguing that the title A office aide, @ upon its recreation in 1981, has been correctly placed in the Association = s unit consistent with the historical placement of the office aide title in the aides unit.
    The record reveals that in 1976 the Board created the title office aide, and between 1976 and 1980, it employed one half-time office aide in one of its primary schools pursuant to the written job description established for that position. In addition, the office aide title was included in the negotiations unit of aides represented by the Association and was listed in both the 1976-79 and 1979-82 collective agreements between the Board and the Association. The Board has not employed office aides in the primary schools since Spring 1980. At that time it no longer perceived a need to employ an office aide in the primary school setting and the incumbent office aide was transferred into another aide position.
    In September 1981, as the result of a reduction in force among teaching staff and a desire to more efficiently utilize regular secretaries, the Board again A created @ the title office aide, operating under a modified job description more suitable to the secondary school setting, for the purpose of augmenting the secondary school (junior high and senior high) secretarial staff by assigning to office aides routine office duties formerly performed by the secretaries. Three full time office aides commenced employment in September 1981, and a fourth was later added. These hirings resulted in cross-claims of representation by the Federation and the Association. The Board considered the office aides as members of the Association = s unit of aides, thus giving rise to the instant filing by the Federation.
    The undisputed testimony of the Board = s Assistant Superintendent indicates that A the duties and responsibilities of the [current office aides] were made quite different to be working in secondary schools. @ 2/ Whether the current employment of office aides is perceived as having arisen from a newly created title, or a recreated title, or merely a revised title, the determination as to their unit placement, as dictated by the facts of this matter, is the same.
    Current office aides work side-by-side with Board secretarial staff performing less-skilled secretarial/clerical job functions. The office aides and the secretaries share common supervision. The record testimony reveals that, when secretaries are absent, office aides perform many of their functions. As opposed to all other employees in aide titles, they do not have a significant interaction with students. Their work, and their employment conditions, are such that they must be included in the Federation = s unit of secretaries, with whom they share a community of interest.
    In its exceptions, the Association urges that the historical placement of office aides in the aides = unit mandates the inclusion of the current office aides in the aides = unit, absent a record demonstrating irresponsible representation.3/ For the above-stated reasons, the undersigned does not find the historical argument significant under the circumstances herein.


    The instant determination including office aides in the Federation = s unit shall be effective immediately. In re Clearview Reg. H.S. Dist. Bd. of Ed., D.R. No. 78-2, 3 NJPER 248 (1977).4/
    BY ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR
    OF REPRESENTATION

    Carl Kurtzman, Director

    DATED: June 17, 1983
    Trenton, New Jersey
    1/ The Board also filed exceptions but later withdrew its exceptions by letter dated January 31, 1983.

      2/ By contrast, the Association urges that the language of the 1976 office aide job description, when compared with the language of the 1981 office aide job description, reveals insignificant differences. The undersigned finds that the oral testimony of the Board = s Assistant Superintendent is a far more reliable indicator of the nature of the employment of office aides.
      3/ Between 1976 and 1980, the Board employed one half-time office aide in a primary school. The title was placed in the aides unit. Both the majority representative of the aides and the majority representative of the secretaries were affiliates of the NJEA during this period. The unit placement was not disputed and accordingly, not reviewed, by the Commission.
      4/ There is no need to consider unit placement relative to the past office aide position. Should such position someday be recreated, a Petition for Clarification of Unit may be filed in the event of a dispute.
    ***** End of DR 83-35 *****