D.U.P. NO. 82-18

STATE OF NEW JERSEY

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF REPRESENTATION

In the Matter of

STATE OF NEW JERSEY,

Respondent,

-and-	Docket No. CI-82-5

DELANEY W. ZANES,

Charging Party.

REFUSAL TO ISSUE COMPLAINT

On July 20, 1981, an Unfair Practice Charge was filed with the Public Employment Relations Commission (the "Commission") by Delaney W. Zanes (the "Charging Party") alleging that the State of New Jersey (the "State") has engaged 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"). The Charging Party alleges that the State failed to negotiate a change in a term and condition of employment with the Communications Workers of America ("CWA"), the majority representative of a negotiations unit in which the Charging Party is included, allegedly in violation of 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.

The Charging Party alleges that the State has committed an unfair practice by failing to negotiate certain changes in terms and conditions of employment with the majority representative. By the filing of the charge, the Charging Party is seeking to require that the State engage in negotiations with CWA. There is no allegation, however, that CWA has sought negotiations with the State; nor is there any claim that CWA has improperly represented the interests of negotiations unit members by not seeking negotiations.

Under the limited facts which are alleged, it would run contrary to the purpose of the Act to permit the individual to stand in the shoes of the majority representative. The obligation of public employers to negotiate in good faith under N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.3 is owed solely to a majority representative. Pursuant to § 5.3 majority representatives are the "exclusive representatives for collective negotiations." Although the majority representative is statutorily obligated to represent the interests of unit members, under the principle of exclusivity, negotiations may only be demanded by the majority representative. Accordingly, as the right to demand negotiations flows exclusively to the majority representative, and as it is not alleged herein that the majority representative has violated its representational responsibilities to unit members, there can be no basis for the individual's assertion of a § 5.4(a)(5) claim.

For this reason, the undersigned has consistently declined to issue complaints under § 5.4(a)(5) in similar cases. The Commission has also found allegations of this nature inappropriate for litigation.5/

Subsequent to the filing of the instant Unfair Practice Charge, by letter dated August 5, 1981, the undersigned informed the Charging Party that in the absence of a withdrawal request or amended Charge which would meet the Commission's complaint issuance standards, the undersigned would issue a decision declining to issue a complaint. The undersigned has not received a reply to the August 5 letter, nor has the Charge been amended.

Accordingly, the undersigned declines to issue a complaint.

BY ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR

OF UNFAIR PRACTICES

/s/Carl Kurtzman, Director

DATED:	December 22, 1981

Trenton, New Jersey