A.B.D. No. 88-2 1.
A.B.D. No. 88-2
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION APPEAL BOARD
OAL DKT #PRB-4067-87
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-l7
CARL M. MAFFEO,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS
OF AMERICA
Respondent.
OAL DKT #PRB-5l79-87
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-7
MARVIN C. PORTER,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS
OF AMERICA
Respondent.
OAL DKT #PRB-5l80-87 (HARRIS)
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-l5
OAL DKT #PRB-5l80-87 (BURNS)
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-l6
OAL DKT #PRB-5l80-87 (WAGNER)
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-l9
ROBERT HARRIS, DOROTHY K. BURNS,
AND FRANK J. WAGNER,
Petitioners,
v.
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS
OF AMERICA
Respondent.
OAL DKT #PRB-5l8l-87
AGENCY DKT #AB-87-27
ANTHONY S. PILAWSKI,
Petitioner,
v.
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS
OF AMERICA
Respondent.
Carl M. Maffeo, Marvin C. Porter, Robert Harris, Dorothy K. Burns, Frank J. Wagner and Anthony S. Pilawski, petitioners pro se
Steven P. Weissman, Esq. and Michael T. Leibig , Esq., for respondent (Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO)
DECISION AND ORDER
Carl M. Maffeo, Marvin C. Porter, Robert Harris, Dorothy K. Burns, Frank J. Wagner and Anthony S. Pilawski filed petitions of appeal with the Public Employment Relations Commission Appeal Board. The petitioners are employed by the State of New Jersey and are represented for purposes of collective negotiations by respondent, Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO ("CWA"). They pay representation fees in lieu of dues to the CWA. The petitions seek review of representation fees paid to the CWA and its affiliated locals for varying periods during calendar years 1985 through 1987. Answers to the petitions were filed by the CWA. On June 11 and July 29, 1987, these matters were transferred to the Office of Administrative Law as contested cases and were assigned to Administrative Law Judge James A. Ospenson. Prior to the opening of hearings, CWA and the petitioners entered into settlements. On
December 4, 1987, Judge Ospenson issued his "Initial Decision-Settlement." Judge Ospenson reviewed the terms of the settlements and concluded that they were entered into voluntarily and disposed of all issues in dispute. He approved the settlements and ordered that all parties comply with their terms. Pursuant to N.J.S.A . 52:14B-10, the matter is now before the Appeal Board to affirm, reverse, remand or modify Judge Ospenson's order.
We have reviewed the settlements and Judge Ospenson's order (attached hereto), pursuant to N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10, and conclude that his action is correct.
ORDER
The Initial Decision-Settlement of Judge Ospenson is hereby affirmed.
BY ORDER OF THE APPEAL BOARD
WILLIAM L. NOTO
Chairman
Chairman Noto and Board Members Verhage and Dorf voted in favor of this decision, none opposed.
DATED: TRENTON, NEW JERSEY
January 21, l988 ***** End of ABD 88-2 ***** |