MINUTES OF MEETING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION May 26, :00 a.m. 495 West State Street Trenton, New Jersey

Similar documents
19: Who may file

NEW JERSEY STATE MODEL PROCEDURES FOR INTERNAL COMPLAINTS ALLEGING DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR STORY COUNTY

Rules of the City of New York Title 61 - Office of Collective Bargaining Chapter 1 - Practice and Procedure

: SCHOOL ETHICS COMMISSION

STATE OF MICHIGAN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION LABOR RELATIONS DIVISION

Citation: W. W. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission, 2015 SSTAD 924 W. W. and. Canada Employment Insurance Commission. and

Michigan Employment Relations Commission

CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS

EMPLOYEES GUIDE TO APPEALING A WORKERS COMPENSATION CLAIM DENIAL

TITLE 18 INSURANCE DELAWARE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Consumer Rights. 901 Arbitration of Automobile and Homeowners' Insurance Claims

1999 BY-LAWS OF THE MUNICIPAL ATTORNEY'S ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO

Counsel must be fully familiar with the Uniform Civil Rules for the Supreme Court 22 NYCRR Part 202.

7.3 PREHEARING CONFERENCES AND SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

Summary Plan Description for the Peace Officers Legal Defense Fund (POLDF) and Trust

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT CUSTODY & PARENTING TIME

We trust the information supplied will guide you accordingly. Association Regulation Unit Planned Real Estate Development

CHAPTER 42A HEARINGS AND APPEALS. Act shall mean the Casino Control Act, N.J.S.A. 5:12-1 et seq.

Case4:12-cv KAW Document2-1 Filed06/25/12 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND DIVISION

WEST VIRGINIA PETITIONER S DIVORCE PACKET INSTRUCTIONS * IMPORTANT INFORMATION * TIME DEADLINES

- ORDER BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES STATE OF KANSAS DIANE MARIE TAYLOR, ) 1. Complainant, ) )

Any civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS

DIVORCE ANSWER PACKET

Title 31 MARYLAND INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

STATE OF MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND ECONOMIC GROWTH OFFICE OF FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE SERVICES

Bylaws of the Lawyer-Client Fee Dispute Resolution Committee of the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association. Enacted November 18, 2015

151 FERC 61,274 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

June 25 Journal of Assembly. Friday, June 25, o clock a.m. Prayers.

Instructions for Use. Agreement for Services

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Mahoning County Criminal Local Rules of Court. Table of Contents. 2 Grand Jury 2. 3 Dismissals Appointment of Counsel... 4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING COMPLAINT BY PRISONERS UNDER THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, 42 U.S.C.

What to Expect In Your Lawsuit

Jury Duty and Selection

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division

What Does It Mean To Be A Home Rule Township?

City of Miami. City Hall 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL www. miamigov. corn. INeuhr _611di[G. J>Jf ^ ^^1 ^ 'l^^l^ Meeting Minutes

Case 4:08-cv MHS-ALM Document 58 Filed 06/30/2009 Page 1 of 9

PLEASE NOTE. For more information concerning the history of this Act, please see the Table of Public Acts.

Case 5:06-cv XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Santa v Azure Nightclub Inc NY Slip Op 30175(U) January 5, 2015 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: Judge: Howard H.

Philadelphia Board of Ethics Meeting Minutes May 15, :00 pm One Parkway Building 1515 Arch Street, 18 th Floor

NEW JERSEY ADMINISTRATIVE CODE Copyright 2013 by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law

STATE OF MICHIGAN FAMILY INDEPENDENCE AGENCY

Minutes of Board Meeting March 10, 2010 Conyers Headquarters

Case 1:14-cv JEB Document 17 Filed 09/23/14 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNOPPOSED MOTION TO DISMISS

KENT COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT PROCEDURES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL HEARING

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No In re: JOHN W. HOWARD, Debtor. ROBERT O. LAMPL, Appellant

DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD

CITY OF CLEVELAND LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL 1099

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY CHANCERY DIVISION COUNTY PROBATE PART. [Caption: See Rule 4:83-3 for Probate Part Actions] CIVIL ACTION

ARBITRATION RULES OF THE COURT OF ARBITRATION AT THE POLISH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

CHAPTER 49. PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS. CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN SUPREME COURT Act 72 of The People of the State of Michigan enact:

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ARIZONA STATE SENATE 46TH LEGISLATURE FIRST REGULAR SESSION

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Agenda Borough of Union Beach Thursday, September 18, 2014, 8:00 p.m. Council Meeting Room, Municipal Building 650 Poole Avenue, Union Beach, NJ

Department of Health and Human Services DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BOARD. Civil Remedies Division

BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION

STATE OF CONNECTICUT LABOR DEPARTMENT CONNECTICUT STATE BOARD OF LABOR RELATIONS

TITLE 102 PROCEDURAL RULE WORKERS COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW SERIES 1 RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

BEFORE THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS STATE OF OREGON for the DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND BUSINESS SERVICES INSURANCE DIVISION ) ) ) ) )

National Labor Relations Board Rules That Mandatory Arbitration Clause Violates The National Labor Relations Act

PURSUANT TO INTERNAL REVENUE CODE SECTION 7463(b),THIS OPINION MAY NOT BE TREATED AS PRECEDENT FOR ANY OTHER CASE.

SMALL CLAIMS DIVISION INFORMATION

U.S. ELECTION ASSISTANCE COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL FINAL REPORT USE OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS TO SETTLE A CLAIM

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT OF THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO PREHEARING INSTRUCTIONS

Do we now have the long awaited answer to the question of whether police officers can take compensatory time off on demand?

Frequently Asked Questions Foreclosure

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2015 H 1 HOUSE BILL 741. Short Title: Shift Workers' Bill of Rights. (Public)

NEW JERSEY TRANSPORTATION TRUST FUND AUTHORITY. Minutes of the special meeting of the New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority (the

AE RISK REVIEW A PUBLICATION FOR DESIGN PROFESSIONALS YOUR RISK MANAGEMENT CONNECTION. Prevailing Opinions on Prevailing Party Contract Clauses

Illinois Open Meetings Act Frequently Asked Questions for Public Bodies

Case 1:06-cv BLW Document 144 Filed 05/11/09 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Section Nine POLICE EMPLOYEE DATA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA NORFOLK DIVISION 2Dub APR - 3 PI: 41 COMPLAINT

FINAL ORDER Effective: 11/08/2004

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE TITLE 1 GENERAL PROVISIONS CHAPTER 100 APPLICABILITY AND CITATION

Major changes in Belgian dismissal rules

AN ACT. To amend chapter 383, RSMo, by adding thereto thirteen new sections relating to the Missouri health care arbitration act.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs Oct. 6, 2008

Business Advisory Board Best Practice Guide 1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

E Election Y Law Enforcement Commission E EC N E W J E R S. State of New Jersey ELECTION LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION

LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT LAW UPDATE FOR MAY 2016 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES CONFERENCE. Timothy L. Davis. Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP

Motor Vehicle Lemon Law

LICENSE APPEAL COMMISSION CITY OF CHICAGO

In the Matter of Peter Kristensen DOP Docket No (Merit System Board, decided December 15, 2004)

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION DIVISION OF FLORIDA LAND SALES, CONDOMINIUMS, AND MOBILE HOMES

BEFORE THE ARBITRATOR. In the Matter of the Arbitration of a Dispute Between SCHWARTZ MANUFACTURING COMPANY. and

CIRCUIT COURT. Uncontested Divorce Procedures Manual

# (OAL Decision:

Complaint, Investigation and Hearing Procedure Rules (effective November 15, 2012)

Case 4:04-cv Document 84 Filed in TXSD on 02/02/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT

Human Resources People and Organisational Development. Disciplinary Procedure for Senior Staff

DENVER OFFICE OF RISK MANAGEMENT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

BEFORE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH APPEALS BOARD

Transcription:

MINUTES OF MEETING NEW JERSEY PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION May 26, 2011 10:00 a.m. 495 West State Street Trenton, New Jersey The meeting was called to order by Chair P. Kelly Hatfield. Present were: Commissioners: Patrick V. Colligan Adrienne E. Eaton John H. Eskilson Sharon Krengel Paula B. Voos Also present were: Don Horowitz, Deputy General Counsel Christine Lucarelli-Carneiro, Deputy General Counsel Annette Thompson, who acted as Stenographer At the commencement of the meeting, Chair Hatfield, pursuant to section 5 of the Open Public Meetings Act, entered this announcement into the minutes of the meeting: Adequate notice has been provided by the dissemination of a written Annual Notice of Meeting. On December 16, 2010 a copy of such notice was: (a) prominently posted in a public place at the offices of the Public Employment Relations Commission; (b) sent to the business offices of the Trenton Times, the Bergen Record, and the Camden Courier Post, as well as to the State House press row addresses of 25 media outlets; (c) mailed to the Secretary of State for filing; and (d) posted on the agency s web site. Furthermore on May 19, 2011, copies of an additional written Notice of Meeting were posted and sent in a similar manner.

The first item for consideration was the minutes of the April 28, 2011 meeting. A motion to adopt the minutes was made by Commissioner Voos and seconded by Commissioner Eaton. Commissioner Eskilson abstained. The motion was unanimously approved (Chair Hatfield, Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Krengel and Voos). The next item for consideration was the minutes of the May 5, 2011 special meeting. A motion to adopt the minutes was made by Commissioner Krengel and seconded by Commissioner Eskilson. The motion was unanimously approved (Chair Hatfield, Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Eskilson, Krengel and Voos). Chair Hatfield announced that Gayl Mazuco will be joining the Public Employment Relations Commission as the Director of Unfair Practice and Representation. Ms. Mazuco will be assuming the position which was held by Arnold Zudick who retired in December. Ms. Mazuco is currently an assistant attorney general with the Department of Law and Public Safety. She has extensive legal experience as a labor relations professional. In her role as the Director of Legal Affairs and Employee Relations, she has coordinated labor policy and contract administration issues for the Office of the Attorney General, the Department s administrative division. Ms. Mazuco also has a background in the education field. Prior to joining the Office of the Attorney General, AAG Mazuco was an assistant section chief in the -2-

Division of Law, where she was responsible for leading the higher education assignment. She has both civil and criminal trial experience, and has expertise with all aspects of administrative practice. Ms. Mazuko is a cum laude graduate of Drew University, holds a Masters Degree in Political Science from Rutgers University, where she was an Eagleton Fellow, and is a cum laude graduate of Rutgers School of Law, Camden. It is anticipated that Gayl will join us on June 6, 2011. I hope you will join me in welcoming her to the Agency. I also would like to acknowledge and thank Deputy Director Jonathan Roth for his support and leadership over the past few months. I appreciate his dedication to the Agency and his willingness to go the extra mile. The first case for consideration was Jose Santana and Stockton State College, OAL Docket No. CSV 477-09, Agency Docket No. 2009-2165 and State of New Jersey Stockton State College and IFPTE Local 195, PERC Docket No. CO-2008-321. Commissioner Eaton moved the draft decision and Commissioner Colligan seconded the motion. Commissioner Eskilson stated that he did not feel there was ample evidence to support protected activity. Ms. Lucarelli- Carneiro responded that there is a line, which is not always clear, between protected activity and unprotected activity. When a union official is approaching an employer about union related business that official is given a certain amount of latitude. -3-

Cases have found that the conversations can take the form of arguments, objections or raising of the voices. This decision finds that this particular incident was protected activity in accordance with the precedent that we have on this issue. The administrative law judge recognized in this decision that neither party acted in an ideal fashion and that the situation have been handled better by both individuals. Commissioner Eskilson stated there were people misbehaving on both ends. Ms. Lucarelli- Carneiro stated that the ALJ made several credibility determinations in this case and the standard of review is a very high standard of review. It would be a heavy burden to overturn the credibility determinations that the ALJ made. The motion was approved by a vote of five in favor (Chair Hatfield, Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Krengel and Voos), and one opposed (Commissioner Eskilson). The next case for consideration was University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Fraternal Order of Police, UMDNJ Local No. 74, Docket No. CO-2009-446. Commissioner Colligan moved the draft decision and Commissioner Eaton seconded the motion. Commissioner Colligan noted that on page 10 of the draft decision it states that the transfer will not be rescinded. It appears that the decision is being questioned but then the transfer still stands. Mr. Horowitz responded that the charge alleges that the violation occurred by refusing to negotiate over -4-

how to determine to pick an individual for an involuntary transfer. The case law is uniform that an employer s reason for making an involuntary transfer of a police officer can not be challenged. Reassignments and transfers of police officer is not mandatorily negotiable. Commissioner Colligan stated that his issue specifically with this case is that this is an extraordinary transfer. Mr. Horowitz responded that there is a stipulated record in this case and we can not add facts or invite the parties to add facts when it has been agreed to send their dispute to the Commission based on a very finite set of facts. Chair Hatfield stated that she has great concern about some of the language in draft decision. On page 9 it states that UMDNJ unilaterally challenged the new rule governing working conditions. There was no rule or procedure established. There are only certain facts in front of us and because of that I feel the charging party did not meet the burden of proof in this case. Commissioner Krengel suggested that the language be changed in the decision to say that the transfer can not be rescinded. Mr. Horowitz suggested that an additional court citation be included in reference to involuntary transfer of police officers. Commissioner Eskilson asked for clarification concerning involuntary transfers not being mandatorily negotiable. Mr. Horowitz responded that the criteria that an employer uses to transfer a police officer is not mandatorily negotiable and can -5-

not be attacked in arbitration. The only way it could be attacked is if there is an allegation the transfer was done in response to union activity or for some other discriminatory reason prohibited by the Law Against Discrimination. Chair Hatfield stated the problem with this case is there are no procedures here. Mr. Horowitz stated the question is whether the absence of the procedures is viewed as not a change from the status quo or whether the absence of a procedure triggers a negotiation obligation. The first draft said there was no evidence the status quo was changed, and the second draft says it appears that this situation has never come up before so this is new term and condition of employment concerning procedures pertaining to involuntary transfer. Chair Hatfield stated this is what she has an issue with. She continued that because there was no procedure there is now a new rule governing those conditions. She concluded by stating that she is concerned about the draft decision. Commissioner Krengel moved that the draft decision be amended to reflect her recommended change and Commissioner Voos seconded. The motion to amend the draft decision was approved by a vote of five in favor (Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Eskilson, Krengel and Voos), and one opposed (Chair Hatfield). A vote was then taken on the amended draft decision which was approved by a vote of four in favor -6-

(Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Krengel and Voos), and two opposed (Chair Hatfield and Commissioner Eskilson). The next case for consideration was County of Hunterdon and FOP Lodge 29, Docket No. IA-2009-067. Commissioner Eaton moved the draft decision and Commissioner Voos seconded the motion. Commissioner Krengel commented about language at the top of page 2 of the draft decision concerning the arbitrator s award that we are constrained by our rules and standards to affirm the award and we question the arbitrator s decision to award a new salary schedule with automatic increments in the current economic climate. She stated that she had mentioned her concerns about this previously. She continued that throughout the decision it states that we are constrained to follow the arbitrator s award. She stated that if we continue to do this it will have a chilling effect, which should not be our intention. Commissioner Eaton agreed. Commissioner Eskilson stated that the arbitrator has a standard of review, but that there did not seem to be testimony on the issue as to whether or not the salary guide for financial reasons was the guiding force or if there were any other motivating factors. He continued that he understands the need for a stable workforce in a correctional facility. Chair Hatfield responded there actually was testimony from the Director of Public Safety. Ms. Lucarelli-Carneiro responded there was evidence from the union, which the arbitrator credited, that the -7-

County values inexperience over experience and that the more senior officers received smaller raises and that was in large part why there was such turnover. Commissioner Voos stated she agreed and made a motion to strike language in the decision and Commissioner Krengel seconded. The motion to amend the draft decision was approved by a vote of four in favor (Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Krengel and Voos), and two opposed (Chair Hatfield and Commissioner Eskilson). A vote was then taken on the amended draft decision which was approved by a vote of four in favor (Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Krengel and Voos), and two opposed (Chair Hatfield and Commissioner Eskilson). The next case for consideration was Mount Laurel Township and American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 71, Local 3263, Docket No. SN-2010-074. Commissioner Eaton moved the draft decision and Commissioner Voos seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved (Chair Hatfield, Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Eskilson, Krengel and Voos). The last case for consideration was Township of Pennsville and FOP Lodge 6, a/w FOP N.J. Labor Council, Docket No. SN-2010-090. Commissioner Colligan moved the draft decision and Commissioner Krengel seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved (Chair Hatfield, Commissioners Colligan, Eaton, Eskilson, Krengel and Voos). -8-

Commissioner Eaton asked about an Atlantic County case and if there was a motion for consideration. Ms. Lucarelli-Carneiro responded that there is a motion for reconsideration and that the case has been fully briefed. Commissioner Eaton asked if they were asking for interim relief. Ms. Lucarelli-Carneiro responded that interim relief has been denied and now the Commission is being asked to reconsider the request for interim relief. Commissioner Colligan asked if there were any updates concerning the situation about Westlaw. Mr. Horowitz responded that there are no new developments. Bob Hackel, Director of Administration is aware of the situation and is also involved with attempting to resolve this matter. Commissioner Eaton made a motion to adjourn the meeting and Commissioner Eskilson seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved. The meeting was then adjourned. The next meeting is scheduled to be held on Thursday, June 30, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. -9-