D.U.P. NO. 83-13

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF REPRESENTATION

In the Matter of

COUNTY OF BERGEN,

Respondent,

-and-	Docket No. CO-83-275

NEW JERSEY EMPLOYEES LABOR UNION,

LOCAL #1,

Charging Party.

REFUSAL TO ISSUE COMPLAINT

An Unfair Practice Charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations Commission (the "Commission") on April 20, 1983, by the New Jersey Employees Labor Union, Local No. 1 ("Local 1") against the County of Bergen ("County") alleging that the County 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)(5).1/

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.

Local 1 states that it is the recognized majority representative of certain employees of the County and holds a collective negotiations agreement with the County effective January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1982. Local 1 further states that negotiations for a successor agreement with the County commenced.5/ However, Local 1 states that Local 29, RWDSU ("Local 29") filed a Petition for Certification of Public Employee Representative with the Commission seeking to represent a portion of the employees in the unit represented by Local 1,6/ and on January 7, 1983, a Commission designee issued an Interlocutory Decision and Order7/ restraining the County from continuing negotiations with Local 1.8/ Local 1 alleges that the County has violated the Act by refusing to negotiate with it for a successor agreement.

It does not appear from the allegations of the Charging Party that the County's refusal to negotiate is based upon any factor other than its determination to comply with a Commission order. As indicated in n. 7 below, Commission records reveal that Local 1's motion for leave to appeal to the Appellate Division seeking to vacate the interim relief order was denied. The matter was subsequently referred to the Commission, for reconsideration by Local 1, and the Commission declined to lift the injunction.

Based upon the above, the undersigned cannot discern a basis for complaint issuance, particularly where the County's action, complained of by the Charging Party, was mandated by Commission order. It would further appear that the instant charge is an inappropriate collateral attack upon the Commission proceeding in which the order was issued. The Commission's adjudication of the issue raised herein will take place at the conclusion of the plenary hearing proceedings in Docket No. CO-83-149-62, in which Local 1 is participating.

For the above reasons, the undersigned declines to issue a complaint.

BY ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR

OF UNFAIR PRACTICES

/s/Carl Kurtzman, Director

DATED:	May 31, 1983

Trenton, New Jersey