DECISION 10234-A and 10235-A (PECB)

Issue 1: Are the union’s and employer’s appeals procedurally defective?

Issue 2: If the union’s appeal is properly before this Commission, did the Executive Director commit reversible error by dismissing the union’s merger petition because the union sought to merge an inappropriate bargaining unit with an appropriate bargaining unit?

Issue 3: If the employer’s appeal is properly before this Commission, did the Executive Director commit reversible error by dismissing the employer’s unit clarification petition?

The union’s appeal is properly before this Commission, but its effectiveness on appeal is limited based upon the union’s failure to specifically cite to those portions of the record that, in the union’s opinion, do not support the Executive Director’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.

With respect to the substantive portions of the union’s appeal, the Commission affirms the Executive Director’s decision in all aspects. This record supports a finding that the ROUTED bargaining unit is inappropriate because the worker/drivers are included in the existing bargaining unit.

Because the ROUTED unit is inappropriate, it is unnecessary to consider whether the employer’s cross-appeal is appropriately before this Commission or whether the Executive Director’s decision to dismiss the employer’s unit clarification petition was appropriate.

For the full decision, click here.

By: Marilyn Glenn Sayan, Chairperson
Pamela G. Bradburn, Commissioner
Thomas W. McLane, Commissioner
August 12, 2008

Rita DiIenno, for the union.
Shannon Phillips, for the employer.

Cases 21629-C-08-1331 and 21775-E-08-3370

ERC