Compton Unified School District (PERB 0109E)

STATE
	OF
	CALIFORNIA
DECISION
	OF 	THE
PUBLIC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELATIONS
	BOARD
COMPTON
	UNIFIED
	SCHOOL
	DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
CALIFORNIA 	TEAMSTERS, 	PUBLIC,
PROFESSIONAL,
	AND
	MEDICAL 	EMPLOYEES	
UNION,
LOCAL
	911,
	AFFILIATED
	WITH
	THE
INTERNATIONAL
	BROTHERHOOD 	OF
	TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEURS,
	WAREHOUSEMEN
	AND
	HELPERS
OF
	AMERICA,
Employee
	Organization,
and
LOS 	ANGELES
	COUNTY
	BUILDING
	AND
	TRADES
COUNCIL,
	COMPTON
	BUILDING
	TRADES
ASSOCIATION,
Employee
	Organization,
APPELLANT,
and
CALIFORNIA
	SCHOOL 	EMPLOYEES
	ASSOCIATION
	and
its
	Compton
	Chapter
	No.
	30,
Employee
	Organization,
and
LOS 	ANGELES CITY
	AND
	COUNTY 	SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES 	UNION,
	LOCAL
	99,
	SEIU,
Employee
	Organization.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case 	Nos.
	LA-R-310
LA-R-311
LA-R-350
LA-R-718
PERB
	Decision
	No.
	109
October
	26,
	1979
Appearances:	
Edna 	E.
	J. 	Francis, 	Attorney 	(Paterson
	&
Taggart)
for
	Compton
	Unified 	School
	District;
	Robert
	D.
	Vogel, 	Attorney(Brundage, 	Beeson
	&
Pappy)
	for 	California 	Teamsters, 	Public,
Professional,
	and 	Medical 	Employees 	Union, 	Local 	911;

Donald 	L.
	Goodman
	and
	Rose
	Dick
	for
	California
	School
	Employees
Association,
	Compton
	Chapter
	No.
	30;
	William
	J.
	Smith,
	Attorney
(Brundage, 	Beeson
	&
Pappy)
	for
	Los
	Angeles
	County
	Building
	and
Trades
	Council,
	Compton
	Building
	Trades
	Council;
Robert 	Anderson,
	Los
	Angeles
	City
	and 	County
	School
	Employees
Union,
	Local
	99,
	AFL-CIO.
Before 	Gluck,
	Chairperson;
	Moore 	and
	Gonzales,
	Members.
DECISION
This 	case
	is
	before 	the
	Public
	Employment
	Relations
	Board
(hereafter
	PERB
	or
	Board)
	itself
	on
	exceptions
	filed
	by
	the
Compton
	Building
	Trades
	Association
	(hereafter
	CBTA)
	to
	the
attached
	hearing
	officer's
	proposed
	decision
	establishing
	a
unit
	of 	operations-support 	services
	employees
	including
	skilled
crafts
	employees.
	The
	hearing
	officer's
	statement 	of 	the
procedural
	history
	and
	facts 	relevant 	to
	this
	appeal
	are
substantially 	correct,
1 	and
	are
	adopted 	as 	the 	findings 	of
the
	Board
	itself.
	For
	the 	reasons
	that
	follow,
	we
	affirm 	the
hearing
	officer's
	decision 	in
	this
	case,
	and
	adopt 	the 	proposed
order 	as 	the 	order 	of 	the
	Board
	itself.
1
we
	note
	that
	the
	California
	Teamsters,
	Public,
Professional
	and
	Medical
	Employees 	Union, 	Local 	911
	(hereafter
Teamsters)
	filed
	its
	requests 	for 	separate 	units
	of
	drivers
	and
security 	officers
	on
	April 	2, 	1976,
	and
	that
	CBTA
	fil 	its
request 	for
	a 	i
	ed
	crafts 	unit
	on
	April 	6, 	1976,
	and
	not
	on
il
	1, 	1976, 	as 	heari 	ficer
2

DISCUSSION
I.
	The
	Sweetwater
	Units
The
	Educational
	Employment
	Relations
	Act
	(hereafter
	EERA
	or
Act)
2	
is
	designed:
•.•
	to
	promote
	the
	improvement
	of
personnel
	management 	and
	employer-employee
relations
	within
	the
	public
	school
	systems
in 	the
	State
	of
	California
	by
	providing
	a
uniform
	basis
	for 	recognizing 	the
	right
	of
public
	school
	employees
	to
	join 	organi-
zations
	of
	their
	own
	choice, 	to
	be
represented
	by
	such
	organizations 	in
	their
professional
	and 	employment
	relationships
with
	public
	school 	employers,
	to
	select
	one
employee
	organization
	as 	the
	exclusive
representative
	of 	the
	employees
	in
	an
appropriate
	unit,
	and
	to 	afford
	certificated
employees
	a
	voice
	in 	the 	formulation 	of
educational 	policy.
	[Emphasis
	added.]
To
	this
	end,
	an 	employee
	organization
	may
	request
	a
	public
school
	employer
	to 	recognize
	it,
	"alleging 	that
	a
	majority 	of
the
	employees
	in
	an
	appropriate 	unit
	wish
	to
	be
	represented 	by
such
	organization."
	(Gov. 	Code
	sec. 	3544(a),
	emphasis
	added.)
An
	employer
	may
	refuse 	to 	grant 	recognition
	when
	it
	"doubts
the 	appropriateness 	of
	a
	unit."
	(Sec.
	3544.l(a) .) 	In 	those
cases, 	either
	the
	employer
	or 	the
	employee
	organization
	may
petition
	PERB
	to 	determine 	"the 	appropriateness 	of
	a
	unit."
(Sec.
	3544.S(a).)
	(See 	so
	section
	3541.
3
(a)
• )	
St	
s
determining 	appropriate 	units 	are 	set
	by
	section 	3545(a):
Educational
	Employment
	Relations
	Act
	is 	codified 	at
Government 	Code
	section
	3540
	et 	seq. 	All 	section 	references
herein 	are 	to 	the 	Government 	Code
	unless 	otherwise 	noted.
3

In
	each
	case
	where
	the
	appropriateness 	of
the
	unit
	is
	an
	issue,
	the
	board
	shall
	decide
the
	question
	on
	the
	basis
	of 	the
	community
of
	interest
	between
	and 	among
	the
	employees
and
	their
	established 	practices
	including,
among
	other
	things,
	the
	extent
	to
	which
	such
employees
	belong
	to
	the
	same
	employee
organization,
	and
	the
	effect
	of
	the
	size
	of
the
	unit
	on
	the
	efficient
	operations 	of 	theschool
	district.
In
	Sweetwater
	Union 	High
	School
	(11/23/76),
	EERB
	Decision
No. 	4
	at
	18,
	the
	Board
	established 	three
	classified
	units
	which
have
	come
	to
	be
	known
	as 	"presumptively
	appropriate
	units."3
These
	units
	are
	(1)
	instructional
	aides 	{paraprofessionals},
(2)
	office-technical
	and
	business
	services,
	and 	(3)
	operations-
support
	services.
The
	operations-support 	services 	unit 	typically
	includes
rank
	and
	file
	transportation, 	custodial,
	grounds, 	maintenance,
food
	service
	and
	warehouse 	employees.4 	In
	three 	cases 	the
Board
	has
	specifically
	included
	skilled 	craft
	employees
	in
	the
3
see
	e.g.,
	Santa 	Clara
	County
	Superintendent 	of 	Schools
(7/19/78)
	PERB
	Decision
	No. 	59
	at
	6;
	Antioch 	Unified 	School
District
	(11/7/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	37
	at
	12
	(concurring
opinion); 	(Greenfield
	Union
	School
	District
	(10/25/77)
	EERB
Decision
	No. 	315
	at
	2
	(concurring 	opinion);
	Sacramento
	CityUnified
	School
	District
	(9/20/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	30
	at
	4;
Foothill-DeAnza
	Community
	College
	District
	(3/1/77)
	EERB
Decision
	No. 	10
	at
	2.
4
see 	Sweetwater, 	supra,
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	4
	at
	18. 	See
so,
	e.g.,
	Fremont
	Unified 	School
	District
	(12/16/76)
Decision
	No. 	6
	at
	13=T4; 	Sacramento
	City Unified 	School
District
	(9/20/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	30
	at
	13.
4

operations-support
	unit.5	
In
	a
	fourth 	case,
	the
	Board
established
	a
	separate
	skilled
	crafts
	unit,
	holding
	that:
The
	[Sweetwater]
	presumption
	is
	rebuttable.Further,
	a
	party
	may
	show
	that
	a
	unit
	which
deviates
	from
	a
	presumptively
	appropriate
unit
	is
	also 	appropriate.
	In
	this
	case,
...
	a
	unit
	of
	'skilled 	crafts
	and
maintenance'
	employees
	is
	appropriate
	on
	the
basis
	of
	a
	separate
	community
	of
	interest.
[Foothill-DeAnza
	Community
	College
	District
(3/1/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No.
	10
	at
	2.
	But
	seeAntioch
	Unified
	School
	District
	(11/7/77)
	at
12
	(concurring
	opinion).]
II.
	The
	Significance 	of 	the
	Sweetwater
	Presumption
By
	creating 	three
	"presumptively
	appropriate 	units" 	for
	the
classified
	service,
	the
	Board
	determined
	that
	a
	strong
community
	of
	interest
	generally
	exists
	among
	employees 	in 	each
of 	these
	groups.
	The
	Board
	further
	determined
	that
	those
	units
"reflect
	a
	proper 	balance
	between
	the
	harmful
	effects
	on
	an
employer
	of 	excessive
	unit
	fragmentation
	and
	the
	harmful
effects
	on
	employees
	and
	the
	organizations 	attempting 	to
represent
	them
	of
	an
	insufficiently
	divided 	negotiating
	unit
	or
units."
	(Antioch
	Unified
	School
	District,
	supra,
	EERB
	Decision
No. 	37
	at
	7.)
5
san
	Mateo 	Union 	High 	School
	District
	(3/22/78)
	PERB
Decision
	No.
	49;
	Sacramento
	City 	Unified 	School
	District
(9/20/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No.
	30; 	Fremont
	Unified 	School
	District
(12/16/76)
	EERB
	Decision
	No.
	6.
5

Having
	made
	these 	determinations,
	the
	Board
	presumes
	that
when
	an 	employee
	organization
	seeks
	a
	Sweetwater
	unit
	the
	unit
determination
	criteria
	set
	forth
	in
	section
	3545(a)
	are
	met.
The
	presumption
	thus
	acts
	as
	a
	catalyst
	to
	put
	as
	many
	units
	in
place 	as
	early
	as
	possible.
The
	Sweetwater
	decision
	did 	not
	establish
	the 	"only
appropriate
	units,"
	nor 	even
	the
	"most
	appropriate
	units."
Different 	units
	have
	in
	fact
	been
	found
	appropriate.6	
The
Board
	has
	diligently
	preserved
	its
	option 	to 	create
	other
	units
that
	vary
	from
	the
	Sweetwater
	configuration,7	
and
	has
stressed 	that
	the
	Sweetwater
	presumptions
	are
	rebuttable.
III.
	Establishing 	Variant 	Units
It
	is 	fair
	to
	say
	that
	the
	Board
	prefers
	Sweetwater
	units,
and
	that
	all
	other 	things
	being 	equal
	will
	award 	a
	Sweetwater
6E.g.,
	Foothill-DeAnza
	Community
	College
	District
	(3/1/77)
supra,
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	10
	(establishing
	a
	separate 	unit 	of
skilled 	crafts
	and
	maintenance
	employees
	not 	including
	food
services
	employees); 	Sacramento
City 	Unified
	School
	District
(9/20/77)
	supra,
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	30
	(establishing
	a
	separate
unit 	of 	security officers);
	and
	Shasta
	Union 	High
	School
District
	(10/25/77)
	EERA
	Decision
	No.
	34;
	Greenfield
	Union
School
	District,
	(10/25/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	35: 	and
	Fallbrook
Union 	High
	School
	District
	(12/4/78)
	PERB
	Decision
	No. 	78
(establishing
	combined
	units 	of
	instructional
	aides
	and
	officeical
	business 	services
	employees).
7
Foothill-DeAnza
	Community
	College
	District,
	supra,
	EERB
Decision
	No. 	10
	at
	2;
	Fall.brook 	Union 	High 	School
	District
(12/4/78)
	PERB
	Decision
	No. 	78
	at
	6.
6

unit
	when
	it
	is
	petitioned
	for
	or 	agreed
	to,
	even
	when 	a
variant
	unit
	is
	sought
	that
	is
	also 	appropriate.
	This
	does
	not
mean
	that
	a
	variant 	unit 	will
	never
	be 	awarded
	in
	competition
with
	a
	Sweetwater
	unit,
	but
	only
	that
	a
	variant 	unit 	will
	not
be 	awarded
	unless
	it
	is
	more
	appropriate
	than
	the
	Sweetwater
unit
	based
	on 	a
	separate
	and
	distinct
	community
	of
	interest
among
	employees
	in
	the
	variant 	unit
	or
	other
	section
	3545(a)
criteria.8
If
	a
	variant 	unit
	could
	be 	awarded
	only
	when
	the
	Sweetwater
unit
	was
	inappropriate, 	in
	effect
	the 	presumptively
	appropriate
units
	would 	be 	"most"
	or 	"only"
	appropriate
	units.
	The
	EERA
8
consider,
	e.g.,
	Sweetwater
	Union 	High
	School
	(11/23/76)
EERB
	Decision
	No. 	4
	(declining 	to
	establish
	a
	separate
transportation
	or
	custodial-gardening 	unit
	because
	"neither
	has
a 	community
	of
	interest
	separate
	and
	distinct
	from
	the
	other
classified
	employees
	who
	remain
	after
	the
	establishment 	of 	the
instructional
	aides
	and
	office-technical
	and
	business
	services
unit");
	Fremont
	Unified
	School
	District
	(12/16/76)
	EERB
Decision
	No. 	6
	(school
	operations, 	skilled
	trades
	and
	crafts,
transportation
	and 	food
	services 	units 	rejected
	because
	"we
find
	that
	the
	distinguishing
	characteristics,
	taken
	together,are 	not
	sufficient
	to
	establish
	a
	separate
	community
	of
interest
	and
	therefore
	a
	separate 	appropriate 	unit
	because
	the
distinguishing 	characteristics
	do
	not
	substantially 	distinguishthe
	employees
	in 	the 	requested
	unit
	from
	the 	other
	classified
employees");
	San
	Diego
	Unified
	School
	District
	(2/18/77)
	EERB
Decision
	No. 	8 	(
11
[i]n
	the 	absence 	of
	a 	showing
	of
	a
	separate
and
	distinct
	community
	interest
	which 	would
	distinguish
service,
	maintenance, 	or
	custodial
	employees 	from
	other
classified
	employees,
	we
	find
	that 	these 	other
	proposed
	unitsare 	not 	separate 	appropriate 	units");
	Sacramento
	City 	UnifiSchool
	District
	(9/20/77)
	EERB
	Decision
	No. 	30
	("the
	classified
employees 	as
	a 	do
	not
	constitute
	an
	appropri 	unitse
	1
	ficient
	communi
	interest").
7

does
	not
	prescribe
	that
	"the
	most
	appropriate"
	unit
	be
	awarded;
rather,
	the
	statute
	repeatedly
	refers
	to"~£
	appropriate
unit.
119	
Thus 	by
	requiring
	an
	employee
	organization
	to
establish 	that
	a
	variant 	unit
	is
	more
	appropriate
	than
	a
Sweetwater
	unit,
	the
	Board
	gives
	weight
	to
	its
	preference 	for
Sweetwater
	units
	without 	converting
	them
	into
	"most
appropriate"
	or 	"only
	appropriate"
	units.
	In
	this
	sense,
	an
employee
	organization
	need
	not
	rebut 	the
	Sweetwater
	presumption
in 	order 	to 	obtain
	a
	variant 	unit.
In
	contrast,
	to
	defeat
	the 	establishment 	of
	a
	Sweetwater
unit
	when 	no
	other
	unit
	has 	been
	petitioned
	for,
the
	employer
	or
employee
	organizationlO	
must
	demonstrate
	that
	based
	on
	all
	of
the
	criteria
	enumerated
	in 	section
	3545(a), 	the
	Sweetwater
	unit
is
	in
	fact 	inappropriate.
	Since
	the
	Board
	has 	determined
	that
the
	Sweetwater
	units
	presumptively
	meet
	the
	section
	3545(a)
unit
	determination
	criteria,
	a
	Sweetwater
	unit 	will 	invariably
be
	granted
	when 	no
	other 	unit
	is
	requested 	unless 	the
presumption
	is
	rebutted	
by 	evidence
	showing
	that,
	because 	the
section
	3545(a)
	criteria
	are 	not 	in 	fact
	met, 	the
	Sweetwater
unit
	is
	inappropriate.
9
sections
	3540,
	3540.l(e), 	3543.l(a), 	3543.l(d), 	3544(a),3544.3.
	See
	also 	section 	3541.3(a).
	The
	only
	statutoryreference 	to 	"the 	appropriate 	unit"occurs 	in 	section 	3544.3,
	in
which
	"the"
	clearly 	refers
	back
	to
	"an
	appropriate 	unit."
lOsee
	section
	3544
.1 (b).
8

In
	the
	instant
	case,
	based
	on
	the 	record 	as
	a
	whole,
	CBTA
has
	not
	proved
	that 	skilled
	craft
	employees
	have
	a
	community
	of
interest
	separate
	and
	distinct
	from
	operations
	and
	support
employees.
	Rather,
	as
	in
	Sacramento
	City
	Unified
	School
District,
	supra,
	EERB
	Decision
	No.
	30,
	a
	strong
	community
	of
interest
	unites
	all
	operations-support 	services
	employees.
Like
	other 	operations-support
	employees,
	skilled
	crafts
employees
	work
	to
	provide
	a
	proper
	physical
	environment
	and
support
	services
	for
	students.
	The
	hiring
	and
	firing
	procedure
is
	the
	same
	for
	all
	classified
	employees;
	all
	have
	the
	same
salary
	schedule
	and
	fringe
	benefits;
	all
	are
	subject 	to 	the
same
	rules
	and
	regulations.
	Like
	other 	operations-support
personnel,
	skilled 	crafts
	employees
	are 	supervised
	through
	a
line 	that 	is
	ultimately 	responsible 	to
	the 	business
	services
division 	administrator.
	They
	report
	directly
	or
	indirectly
	to
the
	maintenance
	director,
	who
	in 	turn
	is
	responsible 	to 	the
director
	of
	maintenance
	and
	operations.
	The
	director
	of
maintenance
	and
	operations
	is
	in 	charge 	of 	gardeners
	and
custodians
	as 	well 	as
	painters,
	plumbers,
	carpenters,
	and
electricians.
Additionally, 	there
	is
	evidence 	that	
on
	at 	least
	two
occasions
	a
	"non-skilled"
	employee 	has
	transferred 	into
	a
"skilled" 	position
	covered 	by CBTA's	
request. 	Furthermore,
	it
appears	
that 	there	
is
	a
	symbiotic 	relationship
	between 	the
broader 	operations 	support 	services 	unit
	and
	the 	proposed
9

skilled 	crafts
	unit.
	For
	example,
	the
	trucks
	used
	by
	skilled
crafts
	employees
	are
	stored
	and
	fueled
	by
	the
	transportation
department,
	which
	also 	repairs
	some
	of 	the
	equipment 	used
	by
maintenance
	and
	operations 	personnel.
	District
	rules
	command
custodial
	employees
	to 	aid
	maintenance 	workers 	under
	certain
circumstances.
Based
	on
	their
	similar
	work
	goals,
	working
	conditions,
	and
common
	supervision,
	as
	well 	as
	on
	their
	integrated
	work
functions,
	the
	Board
	finds
	that
	all
	operations-support 	services
employees
	share
	a 	community
	of
	interest.
	While
	EERA
	instructs
the
	Board
	to 	consider 	the
	extent 	to
	which
	employees
	in
	a
proposed
	unit
	belong
	to 	the
	same
	employee
	organization
(sec.
	3545(a)),
	84
	percent
	membership
	in
	CBTA
	in
	this
	case
	does
not
	by
	itself
	compel 	a
	finding
	that
	a
	separate
	skilled
	crafts
unit
	is
	more
	appropriate
	than
	a
	comprehensive
	operations-
support 	services 	unit.
The
	hearing
	officer's
	decision 	establishing
	a
	comprehensive
operations-support 	services 	unit
	including
	skilled 	crafts
employees
	is
	accordingly 	affirmed.
ORDER
Upon
	the 	foregoing 	decision
	and
	the
	entire
	record 	in
	this
case, 	the 	Public
	Employment
	Relations
	Board 	ORDERS:
1.	
The	
following 	units 	are 	appropriate 	for 	meeting	
and
negotiating 	provided
	an 	employee	
organization	
becomes
	the
exclusive 	representative:
10

Unit
	A)
	All
	operations-support 	services
	employees
including
	skilled 	crafts
	employees;
	excluding
	all
other
	employees
	including
	management,
	supervisory,
	and
confidential
	employees
	as
	stipulated
	by
	the
	parties
and
	head
	custodians
	I.
Unit	
B)	
As
	stipulated
	by
	the
	parties,
	all
"instructional
	aides"
	(paraprofessionals);
	excluding
all
	other
	employees
	including
	management,
	supervisory,
and
	confidential
	employees
	as
	stipulated
	by
	the
parties.
Unit
	C)
	As
	stipulated
	by
	the
	parties,
	all
"office-technical
	and
	business
	services
	employees;"
excluding
	all
	other
	employees
	including
	management,
supervisory,
	and
	confidential
	employees
	as
	stipulated
by
	the
	parties.
Unit	
D)	
As
	stipulated
	by
	the
	parties,
	all
	"security
officers"
	excluding
	all
	other
	employees
	including
management,
	supervisory,
	and
	confidential
	employees 	as
stipulated	
by	
the
	parties.
2.
	Head
	custodians
	I
	are
	found
	to
	be
	"supervisory"
employees
	within 	the
	meaning
	of 	the
	EERA.
Within 	ten
	(10) 	workdays
	after
	the
	employer
	posts 	the
Notice 	of 	Decision, 	organization
demonstrate 	to
	r
	ional 	director 	at
	30
	cent
support
	i.n 	each
	oft
	above
	units.
11

The
	regional
	director 	shall
	conduct
	an
	election
	at
	the
	end
of 	the 	posting 	period
	if:
(1) 	More
	than
	one
	employee
	organization
	qualifies
	for
	the
ballot,
	or
(2)
	Only 	one 	employee
	organization
	qualifies
	for 	the
ballot
	in
	each
	unit
	and
	the
	employer 	does
	not
	grant 	voluntary
recognition.
Voluntary
	recognition 	requires 	majority
	proof 	of 	support 	in
all
	cases.
	See
	sections
	3544
	and
	3544.1.
The
	date
	used
	to
	establish
	the
	number
	of
	employees
	in 	the
above
	units
	shall
	be
	the 	date 	of
	this
	decision 	unless 	another
date
	is
	deemed
	appropriate
	by
	the
	regional
	director
	and
	noticed
to 	the
	parties.
	In
	the 	event 	another 	date
	is
	selected, 	the
regional 	director
	may
	extend 	the
	time
	for
	employee
organizations 	to
	demonstrate
	at
	least
	30
	percent 	support
	in
	the
units.
By:
	Barbara
	D. 	Moore, 	Member	
H/r'-f
~G1_>2"ck,
	Chairperscm
I
Raymond
	J.
	Gonzales,
	Member,
	Concurring:
I
	agree 	with 	the
	result
	reached
	by
	my
	colleagues 	in 	the
present 	case 	but
	I
	find 	their 	rationale
	wholly 	unacceptable
	and
I
	reject
	the 	standard
	which 	they
	would
	apply 	to 	rebut 	the
Sweetwater 	presumption.
	What
	the 	majority 	has 	done
	in
	this
decision 	is 	to 	continue 	the 	erosion 	of
	a
	reasonable 	uniting
structure 	envisioned 	by 	the
	EERA.
12

It
	is
	unnecessary
	to
	engage
	in 	endless
	semantic
	exercises
over
	the
	meaning
	of 	the
	article
	"an"
	in
	section
	3545(a).
Clearly,
	Sweetwater
	units
	are
	not 	the 	"only"
	units
	which
	the
Board
	will 	establish
	nor
	will
	"any"
	variant 	unit
	be
	established
simply 	because
	it
	meets 	3545(a)
	criteria.
	It
	is
	not
	even
necessary
	to 	speculate
	whether
	a
	Sweetwater
	unit
	is
	the
	"most"
appropriate 	unit
	under
	all
	circumstances;
	it
	is
	enough
	to
	say
that
	under
	the
	facts
	of
	any
	given
	case,
	a
	Sweetwater
	unit,
	if
established,
	would
	logically
	be
	the
	"most
	appropriate"
	unit
	or
there
	would
	be
	no
	reason
	to
	select
	it.
	Nevertheless,
	what
	is
critical
	is
	that
	the
	Board
	has
	established
	a
	presumption,
	which
comports 	with
	the
	statutory
	requirements 	of
	section
	3545(a)
	and
lends
	itself
	to
	the
	efficient
	determination 	of
	units.
	That
being
	so, 	the
	Board 	must
	give
	effect
	to
	that
	presumption
	by
requiring
	parties
	to 	present
	evidence
	which
	in
	fact
	rebuts
	the
presumption,
	that
	is,
	evidence
	which
	demonstrates
	that
	the
Sweetwater
	units
	are
	inappropriate.
Instead,
	however,
	the 	majority
	all
	but
	abandons
	the
Sweetwater 	presumption
	in
	this
	decision
	by
	failing
	to
	impose
any
	significant
	burden
	of 	proof
	on
	the 	party 	petitioning 	for
	a
variant 	unit.
	I
	believe 	that
	the 	Sweetwater 	presumption
	is
more
	than
	a
	procedural 	device
	affecting
	the	
burden	
of 	producing
evidence.
	I
	therefore 	disagree 	with 	the
	majority's
	approach 	of
disregarding
	Sweetwater 	simply 	because	
a
	variant 	unit 	displays
a
	separate
	community
	of
	interest.
	On
	the 	basis 	of 	this 	latest
13

decision, 	it 	appears 	inevitable 	that 	we 	will 	see 	an 	extreme
proliferation 	of 	units 	in 	the 	education 	setting, 	each
demonstrating 	a 	separate 	community 	of 	interest 	without
distinguishing 	itself 	from 	the 	Sweetwater 	unit.l 	This 	would
be 	contrary 	to 	the 	clear 	statement 	we 	made 	in 	Sacramento City,
supra:
A separate 	unit 	is 	not 	warranted 	merely
because 	a 	group 	of 	employees 	share 	a
community 	of 	interest 	among 	themselves, 	when
that 	homogeneous 	group 	forms 	only 	a 	part 	of
a 	larger 	essentially 	homogeneous 	group.
In 	previous 	cases 	where 	we 	have 	applied 	the 	Sweetwater
presumption, 	we 	have 	emphasized 	that 	a 	"separate 	and 	distinct"
community 	of 	interest 	must 	exist 	among 	the 	employees 	in 	a
proposed 	variant 	unit 	before 	the 	variant 	unit 	will 	be
established. 	Presenting 	such 	evidence 	invites 	a 	comparison 	of
the 	variant 	unit 	with 	the 	Sweetwater 	unit; 	otherwise, 	how 	can
the 	two 	be 	distinguished 	from 	each 	other? 	The 	inevitable
result 	of 	comparing 	the 	two 	units 	is 	rejection 	of 	one 	and
establishment 	of 	the 	other 	(or, 	as 	the 	majority 	states, 	one 	is
"awarded 	in 	competition 	with" 	the 	other).
1 The 	standard 	set 	forth 	by 	the 	majority 	in 	the 	present
case 	might 	very 	well 	lead, 	in 	similar 	factual 	circumstances, 	to
acceptance 	of 	proposed 	variant 	units 	which we 	rejected 	in
earlier 	decisions 	such 	as 	Fremont 	Unified 	School 	District
(12/16/76) 	EERB 	Decision 	No. 	6; 	San 	Diego 	Unified 	School 	District
(2/18/77) 	EERB 	Decision 	No. 	8; 	and 	Sacramento 	City 	Unified 	School
District 	(9/20/77) 	EERB 	Decision 	No. 	30.
14

It
	is
	apparent
	to
	me
	that
	section
	3545(a)
	requires
	an
affirmative
	showing
	that
	the
	unit
	determination
	criteria
	have
been
	met
	(that
	is
	precisely
	what
	Sweetwater
	presumes);
therefore,
	before 	the
	Board
	may
	disregard 	the
	Sweetwater
	unit,
it
	must
	have
	proof
	that,
	not 	only
	do
	the
	employees
	in 	the
proposed
	variant 	unit
	lack
	a
	community
	of
	interest
	with
	the
remaining
	Sweetwater
	unit
	employees,
	but
	also
	that
	the
	variant
unit
	itself
	possesses
	a
	separate
	and
	distinct
	community
	of
interest.
	Accordingly,
	I
	would
	treat
	the
	Sweetwater
presumption 	as
	having
	an
	effect
	on
	the
	burden
	of 	the
	party
proposing 	the
	variant 	unit
	to
	prove
	first
	that
	the
	Sweetwater
unit
	is
	inappropriate.
	This
	is
	in
	fact
	what
	my
	colleagues,
perhaps
	unwittingly,
	have
	required 	of
	employers
	and
	employee
organizations
	who
	intervene 	to 	defeat 	the 	establishment 	of
	a
Sweetwater
	unit
	when 	no
	other 	unit
	has 	been
	petitioned 	for,
i.e.,
	those
	parties
	"must
	demonstrate
	that
	based
	on
	all
	the
criteria
	enumerated
	in 	section
	3545(a), 	the
	Sweetwater
	unit 	is
in 	fact 	inappropriate."2
Finally,
	I
	emphasize
	my
	belief 	that 	the 	establishment
	of
the
	Sweetwater
	units
	was 	more
	than 	the 	expression 	of
	a
ence,
	wh
	ies
	exercise	
a	
ective
	ue
ority 	decision, 	at
	8.
15

judgment
	as
	to
	the 	type
	of
	unit
	that
	should
	be
	favored.
Rather, 	the
	Board
	applied
	the
	objective
	criteria
	of
	section
3545(a)
	in
	establishing
	the
	Sweetwater
	units
	and
	it
	must
	accord
the
	Sweetwater
	presumption
	its
	due
	weight 	or
	acknowledge
	that
there
	is,
	in
	reality,
	no
	such
	presumption.
16

PUBLIC
EMPLOYMENT
REIATIONS
BOARD
OF
THE
STATE
OF
CALIFORNIA
In
the Matter of:
COMPTON
UNIFIED
SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
CALIFORNIA
TEAMSTERS,
	PUBLIC,
	PROFESSIONAL,
AND
MEDICAL
EMPLOYEES
UNION,
	LOCAL
911,
AFFILIATED
WITH
THE
INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD
OF TEAMSTERS, 	CHAUFFEURS,
WAREHOUSEMEN AND
HELPERS
OF .AMERICA,
Employee Organization,
and
IDS
ANGELES
COUNTY
BUILDING
AND
TRADES
COUNCIL,
	COMP'IDN
BUILDING
TRADES
COUNCIL,
Employee Organization,
and
CALIFORNIA
SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION,
COMP'IDN
CHAPTER NO.
	30,
Employee Organization,
and
LOS ANGELES
CITY
AND COUNTY SCHOOL
EMPLOYEES
UNION,
	LOCAL
99,
	SEIU,
Employee Organization.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
___________________
___,)
Case Nos. 	lA-R-310
lA-R-311
lA-R-350
lA-R-718
PROPOSED
DECISION
January 27, 	1978
Appearances: 	Edna E.J. 	Francis, Attorney (Paterson & Taggart), 	for
Compton Unified
School
District;
	Robert
D.
	Vogel, 	Attorney 	(Bnmdage, 	Beeson & Pappy),
	for CaliforniaTeamsters, 	Public, 	Professional, 	and Medical Employees Union, 	Local 911; Donald L.
	Goodman
and Rose Dick for California School Employees Association, 	Compton Chapter
No.
	30;
William J. 	Smith, Attorney (Bnmdage, 	Beeson & Pappy), 	for
Los Angeles County Building
and Trades Cmmcil, 	Compton Building Trades Cmmcil; 	Robert Anderson, Los Angeles
City and County School Employees Union, Local 99, AFL-CIO.
Before Kenneth A. 	Perea, Hearing Officer.
-1-

PROCEDURAL
HIS'IORY
The events preceding
the administrative hearing
in
the
above-captioned
matter
are
surrrnarized as follows:
(1)	
On
April 1,
	1976,
	Compton
Building Trades
Association
(CBTA)
	filed
with the
Compton
Unified
School
District
	(District)
	a
request
for
a
unit of skilled
crafts
employees and
California
Teamsters,
	Public, 	Professional,
	and Medical
Employees Union, Local 911 (Teamsters)
	filed
requests
	for
separate
i.mits
of
drivers
	and
security
officers.
(2)	
On
April
15, 1976,
	California
School Employees Association,
	Compton
Chapter
No. 	30
	(CSE.A.)
	filed
an
intervening
petition
for
a comprehensive
unit
of
classified
employees.
(3)	
On
April
28, 	1976,
	the
District
responded
to the
petitions
filed
by
CBTA,
Teamsters and
CSE.A.,
	requesting
"that
the
EERB
detennine
the appropriateness
of
the
unit
which
is
	in
dispute."
(4)	
On May
4, 	1976, Los Angeles City and County School Employees Union,
Local
99 	(SEIU)
	filed
four intervening
petitions
for separate
units of
food
services,
operations, 	security
and accoi.mting
clerk
employees.
(5)	
On
September 22, 	1976,
	the
District
responded
to the
petitions 	filed
by
SEID
doubting the sufficiency of
proof
of thirty
percent support
for
	the
petitioned
for
accolllting
clerk
and food services i.mits.
(6)	
On
September 22, 	1976, 	the
District
amended
its
response to
	the petitions
filed
by
CBTA,
	Teamsters and
CSE.A.
stating that
it
doubted the sufficiency of
proof
of majority support
for
Teamsters' 	and
CSE.A.'s
petitions.
(7) 	The Los Angeles Regional Director for the Public Employment
Board (PERB), 	formerly the Educational Employment Relations Board (EERB), 	conducted
an investigation into the sufficiency of support for the above-described
petitions
and notified the parties of the following findings:
a. 	Teamsters' 	request for a proposed unit of drivers
lacked adequate support;
-2-

b.	
Teamsters'
	request
for
a proposed
unit of
security
officers
lacked adequate support;
c.	
SEIU's
request for
a proposed
unit of
accounting
clerks
lacked adequate support;
d.	
CSEA
filed
as an
intervenor
and
satisfied
the
requisite
30
percent
showing
of
support;
e.	
CBTA
qualified
as
a
majority
petitioner;
	and
f.	
SEIU
qualified
as an
intervenor.
(8)	
Prior
to the
corrmencement
of
the hearing
on June 29, 	1977, Teamsters
made
application to
join
the
hearing as a
party
pursuant
to
Section
33340
of
the
PERB's
rules
and
regulations,
	which
application
was
granted
by
the hearing
officero
A
hearing
was
held
on June 29, August
25
and August 26, 	1977,
	at
which time
the
parties
amended and
restated their
positionso
	The
District,
	SEIU
and
CSEA
agreed upon
creation
of
the three
presumptively
appropriate
units established
by
the
PERB
in
Sweetwater Union High School
District
1 and Fremont Unified School
District
2
--
operations support,
	office
technical
and
paraprofessional
--
with
the addition
of
a
fourth
and
separate security unit.
3 The Teamsters support the
separate security unit
and have no
interest
regarding the other unitso
	CBTA
proposes
	that
a
separate
crafts unit
be
split
out
from the operations support
unit
and takes no
position
regarding the appropriateness
of
any
other
units.
1
EERB
Decision No. 	4, November 23, 	1976.
2
EERB
Decision No. 	6, December 16, 	1976.
3since the hearing in this matter, 	the
PERB
itself
has held that a separate
unit of security officers is appropriate. 	Sacramento City Unified School District,
EERB
Decision No. 	30, 	September 20, 	19770
-3-

From
the
above
discussion,
	it
is
apparent
that
there
is
no
dispute
arrongst
the
interested parties
as
	to
the
creation
of
an
office
technical
unit,
a
paraprofessional
unit
or
a
security
unit
within the
district.
	Therefore,
	the
parties'
	positions are
accepted
as
stipulations
and an
election
in
these
units
	is
directed
by
the
proposed
order
in this
decision
without
further
inquiry.
	The
appropriate
unit
dispute
shall
be
limited
to
a
crafts unit
separate
from an
operations
	support
unit
as
opposed
to
a
single
operations
support
unit.
It
was
	stipulated
by
the
parties that
the
following employees
are
"confidential"
pursuant
to
Section
3540.l(c):
4
secretary to
the superintendent,
eight administrative
secretaries,
	superintendent's
office
secretary,
	budget
technician,
	budget
secretaries
and personnel
assistants.
The
parties further stipulated that
the
following employees
are
"management"
pursuant
to
Section 3540.l(g):
	director of
accounting,
	director of
budgeting,
director
of classified
personnel,
	director of certificated
personnel,
	director
of
maintenance and
operations,
	director of
purchasing,
	director of
transportation,
director
of
security, 	director of
food
services, 	coordinator--special services,
business adrninistrator--services, 	business aclrninistrator--finance.
It
was
stipulated that
the following
classifications are "supervisory"
pursuant
	to Section 3540.l(m): attendance accounting coordinator,
	cafeteria
manager, head custodians
II, 	III
and IV,
	security officer
II,
	security sergeant,
transportation
foreman,
	transportation
shop foreman, 	accounting supervisor,
warehouse supervisor, records management supervisor, 	operations supervisor,
assistant operations supervisor/grounds, maintenance supervisor, 	custodial
4
All statutory references are to the California Government Code unless otherwise
specified.
-4-

supervisor, 	grotmds supervisor, 	supervisor of food services programs, 	food
services supervisor and assistant operations supervisor-custodiano
The hearing officer accepts tl1e above-described stipulations without inquiryo
The District and CSEA take the position that head custodians I 	should be
included in an operations-support services tmito 	SEIU takes the position that
head custodians I are "supervisors" pursuant to Section 3540.l(m).
At the hearing, 	CBTA amended its petition to include all carpenters,
carpenter supervisors, 	clock and bell technicians, 	electrical supervisors,
electricians, 	glaziers, 	locksmiths I 	and II, maintenance workers I and II,
painters I, 	painting foremen, 	painting supervisors, 	plumbers, 	plumbing
supervisors, 	refrigeration technicians, 	typewriter technicians, welders,
refrigerator repairmen (cafeteria), 	audio/visual technicians, 	alann systems
repairmen, 	air conditioning technicians, 	equipment repairmen (cafeteria),
equipment repainren helper 	(cafeteria) •
At the hearing, 	the Teamsters stated that its interest in the proceedings
was limited to representation of a separate security tmit. 	Following the
Teamsters' 	failure to appear at other portions of the hearing, 	cotmsel for the
district moved to dismiss with prejudice the Teamsters from the hearing.
The motion was taken tmder advisement and is hereby denied. 	By not appearing
at other portions of the hearing, 	the Teamsters simply waived its right to
present evidence or argument on issues upon which it previously declared it had no
interest. 	Under these facts, 	a dismissal with prejudice would serve no purposeo 5
5As of this date, 	the Teamsters have not made to the Regional Director a 	30
percent showing of interest in any tmit fotmd to be appropriate in order to
qualify to appear on an election ballot pursuant to PERB Regulation 33480.
-5-

-6-
STATEMENT
OF
TI-IE
ISSUES
10
	Whether a
separate
unit
of
skilled crafts
employees
is
an
appropriate
unit
pursuant
to
Section
3545(a)o
2.
	Whether head
custodians
I
	are
supervisors pursuant
to
Section
3540ol(m).
FilIDINGS
OF
FACT
A.
	Skilled
Crafts
Employees
In
June
of
1975,
	CBTA
sought
recognition
from
the
District
as an employee
organization
pursuant
to the
Winton Act, Education
Code
Section
13080
et
seq.,
repealed
effective July
1, 	1976. 	Pursuant
	to
CBTA's
request, 	the
District
mistakenly granted recognition to
Plumbers' 	Local
No.
	78
in
October
of
1975.
Subsequently,
	CBTA
requested
in
writing to
meet and
confer pursuant
to
the
Winton Act
with appropriate
District
administrators.	
On two occasions
CBTA
did
meet
with representatives
of
the
District
to
establish
ground
rules
	for
future
meet and
confer sessionso 	Attempts were
unsuccessfully
made by
CBTA
to arrange
actual
meet and confer sessions with
District
administrators
	for
the
purpose
of
discussing
wages and working conditions
for the
District's
skilled crafts
employees.
Some
time
after
July 1, 	1976,
	CBTA
filed
an
unfair practice
charge pursuant
to the Educational Employment Relations Act
	(EERA)
	on
behalf
of
members
	of
CBTAO
CBTA
has not
filed
any grievances on
behalf of
its
members.
The
District's
Business Services Division
is
composed
of special services,
food
services,
maintenance and operations, 	public works,
	security
and
transportation
departments o
The maintenance and operations department
is
composed
of custodial and
grounds and maintenance sections •
The ma.intena..-ri.ce section is
composed of carpentry, 	electrical, 	plumbing and
painting shops o
-6-

Employees in the carpentry, 	electrical, plumbing and painting shops report
to the supervisor of the maintenance section. 	The supervisor of the maintenance
section, 	like the supervisor of the grotmds and maintenance section, reports to
the director of the maintenance and operations department. 	The director of the
maintenance and operations depart:ment, 	like the director of the special services,
food services, public works, 	security and transportation departments, 	reports to
the business services division administrator.
The District's painters perform journeyman painter duties in the preparation
of surfaces for painting, mixing and application of paints. 	Minimum qualifications
include the equivalent to graduation from high school or a recognized trade school
in painting, 	completion of an apprenticeship as a painter, 	and knowledge of standard
practices, methods, materials and equipment used in painting, 	tinting and finishing
work.
The District's electricians perform journeyman electrician duties involving
the repair, 	alteration, 	construction, 	installation and maintenance of all types of
electrical systems and equipment. 	Min:imurn qualifications include the equivalent
to graduation from high school or a recognized trade school in electricity, 	completion
of an apprenticeship as an electrician and knowledge of the National Fire Prevention
Codes, methods, 	materials and tools used in the electrical trade.
The District's plumbers perform journeyman plumber duties in the repair or
installation of plumbing fixtures, 	rough plumbing and maintenance of central
heating plants. 	Min:imurn qualifications include the equivalent to graduation from
high school or a recognized trade school in plumbing, 	completion of an apprenticeship
as a plumber and knowledge of the Uniform Plumbing Code and standard practices and
processes of the plumbing trade.
The District's carpenters perform journeyman carpenter duties including
general maintenance work. 	Min:imurn qualifications include 	the equivalent to graduation
from high school or a recognized trade school in carpentry, 	completion of an
-7-

-8-
apprenticeship
as
a
carpenter
and knowledge
of
the standard
practices
of
the
carpentry
trade
including
materials, 	tools
and procedures used
in
both
rough and
finished
carpentry.
Employees
of
the carpentry,
	electrical,
	plt.n:nbing
and
painting
shops work
exclusively with
other
errployees
in
the
maintenance
section.
	Maintenance
men
II
in
the carpentry,
	electrical
and plumbing shops can become journeymen through
infonnal on-the-job
	training.
	Employees
in
the carpentry,
	electrical,
	plumbing
and
painting
shops
report
to
work
at
individual
shops from where they
are
dispatched
to the various
District
locations
where they
perfonn
work.
The
parties further stipulated
as
	follows:
If
called to
testify,
	a
glazier,
	clock
and
bell
technician,
	refrigerator
repainnan,
	air-conditioningtechnician,
	equipment repainnan, welder,
	typewriterrepainnan, 	locksmith,
	audio/visual technician,
	oralann
system repainnan, would
testify
that
they
are
all
skilled
employees whose
skill is
acquired
through
an informal
progression
from
apprentice
to
journeyman,
through
on-the-job
training,
	and/or
classroom education;
that
all
report to
Lloyd Brooks
	[director,
maintenance
and
operations
department], 	and
that
all
work almost
exclusively
in
conjunction with other
maintenance employees.
Work
performed by food
services,
maintenance and
operations
and
transportation
employees
is
of
a manual
nature.
The
hiring
and termination procedures
is
	the same
for
all
District classified
employees.
	All
District classified
errployees have
the
same
salary
schedule, 	fringe
benefits
and
rules
and
regulations.
The minimum
educational requirements
for entry-level positions
in
food
services, 	transportation
and maintenance and operations departments
	is
completion
of
the tenth grade 	while many
of
the positions require the equivalent to graduation
from high school.
In the
last
year and a
half,
	two
custodial employees from the operations
section have transferred to the maintenance section of the maintenance and operations
department -- one to maintenance worker I 	and one to maintenance worker
II.
-8-

CSEA
and
SEIU
have
represented
all
classified
employees
since
Jtme 30, 	1970.
B.
	Head Custodians I
Head
custodians
	I
	are
assigned
a
custodial
crew
of
four
to
six
employees.
Head
custodians
	I
	prepare
work assignments
for custodial
crews
at
each
school
site
in
the
District.
	Should a
member
of
a head
custodian
I's
crew
request
a
	leave
of
absence,
	it
is
	the
head
custodian
I's
responsibility to
reschedule
the
crew's
work schedule
or
schedule a
substitute
custodian
in
order
to insure
that
the custodial
work
at
a given
site is
completed.
Head
custodians
I 	conduct weekly
inspections
of
each
custodial
crew
member's work.
	If
deficiencies
occur
in
a
custodial
crew member's work,
	it
is
the
head
custodian
I's
responsibility
to
cotmsel and
instruct that
member
regarding proper
custodial
methods.
Head
custodians
I
	prepare fonnal
written
evaluations
of
each member
of
his
crew and
discusses with
each crew
member
their
evaluation.
	Head
custodians
	I
jointly
interview with the
school
principal
custodians
who may
be assigned
to
their
respective
school
sites.
	The head custodians I
	then
make a recomnendation
to the school
principal
as
	to
whether a
potential
crew member should be
assigned to his
crew. 	Said recorrrnendations
are
followed by
the
school
principal.
It
is
	the responsibility of
head custodians I
	to
document performance
problems
of custodial
crew members. 	Head custodians I have
the authority to
give
verbal reprimands and recomnend
disciplinary action against custodial
crew
members such as suspension without pay and dismissal. 	Said recom:nendations
are
generally followed.
It is the responsibility of
head custodians I 	to maintain payroll sign-in
sheets at their respective school
sites
and to adjust vacation schedules for
their custodial crews.
-9-

If
there
is
a
particular
custodial
problem
at
a school
site,
	the
school
principal
will
consult with
the
head
custodian
I
who
will
then
assign
a
custodian
to resolve the
problem.
DISCUSSION
AND
CONCLUSIONS
A.
	Skilled
Crafts
Employees
The
PERB
itself
has
recently
addressed
the question
of
whether a
separate
unit of skilled crafts
employees
is
appropriate
pursuant
to
the
EERA
in
Sacramento,
supra. 	In Sacramento
City
Unified School
District, 	skilled crafts
employees
are
paid
on a
separate
salary
schedule,
	are required to
have undergone an
apprentice-
ship
program, work a twelve-rmnth year and an
eight
hour day, 	and
are
assigned
to
work from a
central
location.
While aclmowledging
that "[s]killed crafts
e.rnployees
are
different
in
some
respects
	from
other operations-support services
employees" and "possess
discrete
skills,"
the
PERB
nevertheless held:
The
primary work ftmction
of skilled crafts
employees,
	like
other operations-support
services
employees,
	is
essentially
to provide
a proper physical
environment and support
services for students.
	A
separate
unit
is
not
warranted merely because
of
group
of
employees
share a corrmuni
ty of
:interest
arrong themselves ,
when a homogeneous group forms only a
part of
a
larger essentially
homogeneous group sharing
similar
conditions
of
employment and job ftmctions.Thus, while
we
have determined
that security
officers constitute
a separate appropriate
unit,
this
decision
is
primarily based on the strong
policy considerations
of
the unique ftmction
ofsecurity
guards; 	these policy considerations are
inherent to guards
but not to the
skilled
craftsmen.
The
parallels
between job ftmctions
of the
District's skilled crafts
employees
and Sacramento City Unified School
District's skilled
	employees
are
many.
The primary work ftmction of the
District's skilled crafts e.rnployees, 	as with
other operations-support services employees,
	is essentially to provide a proper
physical environment and support services for students. 	Skilled crafts employees
-10-

-11-
are primarily
assigned
to
work from a
central
location
and form a
part of
a
larger
essentially
hoIIDgeneous group
of
operations-support
services
employees
sharing
similar
conditions
of
employment and
job functions
O
	All
classified
employees
	including
skilled crafts
employees have
the
same
fringe
benefits
and
rules
	and
regulationso
Indeed,
	the
case
for creation of
a
skilled crafts unit
in
the
District
is
weaker than
in
the
Sacramento
City Unified School
District.
	In
the
Sacramento
City Unified
School
District, 	skilled crafts
employees
are
paid
on a
separate
salary
schedule.
	In
the
District, 	skilled crafts
employees
are
compensated
pursuant
to
the
District's
classified
salary
schedule.
	In
the
Sacramento
City Unified
School
District, 	skilled crafts
	employees
are required
to
have
undergone an
apprenticeship
programo
	In
the
District,
	maintenance
men
II
in
the
carpentry,
	electrical
a.rid
plumbing shops can become j
ou...-rneymen
carpenters,
electricians
and plumbers through informal
on-the-job
training.
Thus,
	the hearing
officer
is
compelled
to
conclude, based upon
the
evidence
presented and Sacramento, 	supra,
	that
a
separate
unit of skilled crafts
employees
	is
inappropriate pursuant
to the
EERA.
Bo
	Head Custodians I
Section 3540ol(m) defines a supervisory employee as follows:
"Supervisory employee" means any employee, 	regardless of
job
description,
	having
authority
in
the
interest of
the employer
to hire, 	transfer,
	suspend,
	lay off, 	recall,
	promote, 	discharge,
assign, 	reward,
	or discipline other
employees,
	or the
responsibilityto assign work to and
direct
them
or to adjust their
grievances,
or effectively
recorrrnend such action,
	if,
	in
connection with theforegoing functions, 	the exercise of
such authority
is
not of
a
merely routine or clerical nature, 	but requires the use ofindependent judgment. 	(Emphasis added)
-11-

As
	the
PERB
itself
held
in
Sweetwater,
	supra:
Th.is
section of
the
Act
is
written
in
the
disjunctive;
therefore,
	an
employee
need
not
possess
all
the
emimerated
functions
	or
duties to
be
a
	supervisor.
	The
performance
of
any one
of
the
enurrerated
actions
or
the
effective
power
to
recomnend
such
action
is
sufficient
to
make one a
supervisor
within
the
meaning
of
the
Act.
	[Footnote
omitted.]
1.
	Authority
to
Assign
Head
custodians
	I
	jointly
interview with the
school
principal
custodians
who
may
be
assigned
to
	their
respective
school
sites
and
then
effectively
reconrnend
which
custodians should be assigned
to
their
crews.
	Thus,
	like
school
plant
managers
I,
	II,
	and
III
in
Sacramento,
6 found
to
be
"supervisors"
by
the
PERB
itself,
head custodians
I
	have
the
authority to assign
employees
	to
their
crews.
2.
	Authority
to Discipline
Head
custodians
I
	prepare
formal
written
evaluations
of
each
member
of his
crew
and
discuss with
each
merrber
their
evaluations.
	It
is
	the
responsibility
of
the
head
custodians
	I
	to
document performance problems
of
custodial
crew members. 	Head
custodians
	I
have
the authority to give verbal
reprimands and recomrend
disciplinary
action against custodial
crew members. 	Thus,
	like
building services supervisors
	III
and
Nin
San Diego, 7 found
to be "supervisors"
by
the
PERB
itself,
	head custodians
	I
have
	the
authority to discipline
employees.
3 .	
Authority to
Assign
Work
To
and
Direct
Head
custodians
I 	conduct weekly
inspections
of
each
custodial
crew member's
work,
	counsel and
instruct
crew members,
	should deficiences
in their
work
occur.
~
Decision No. 	30A, October 19, 	1977.
7EERB
T'\ueCJ..SlOil
	• 	• 	1\T
nO.
	8, 	Februar;
18, 1977.
-12-

-13-
Head
custodians
	I
	prepare
work assignments
for
custodial
crews,
	adjust
variation
schedules and
reschedule the crew's
work schedule should a crew
member
be
absent.
	Head
custodians
assign
custodians
to correct
particular
custodial
problems brought
to
their
attention
by
their
school
principal.
Thus,
	like
the
head
custodians
in
Sweetwater,
	supra.
	fotmd
to
be
"supervisors"
by
the
PERB
itself,
	head
custodians
I have
the
authority to assign
work
to
and
direct
employees.
Therefore,
	head
custodians
I
	possess
at
least
three
indicia of
supervisory
status
as
	enumerated
in
Section
3540.l(m):
	the authority to assign,
	discipline
and
assign
work
to
and
direct
employees. 	Accordingly,
	it
is
concluded
that
head
custodians
I
	are
"supervisors"
pursuant
	to the
EERA.
PROPOSED
ORDER
It
is
	the
Proposed Decision
that:
(1) 	The following
tmits
have been agreed
to
by
the
interested parties
as
appropriate for the
purpose
of
meeting and
negotiating,
	provided an employee
organization
becomes
the exclusive representative:
Unit A
--
All "security officers";
	excluding
all
other
employees
including
management, 	supervisory,
and
confidential
employees
as
stipulated
by
the
parties
and head custodians
I.
Unit B
--
All "instructional aides" 	(paraprofessionals);
excluding
all
other
employees including
management, 	supervisory, 	and
confidential
employees as
	stipulated
by the parties
and
head custodians
	I.
-13-

-14-
Unit C
--
All
"office-technical
and
business
services
employees"; 	excluding
all
other
employees
including
management,
	supervisory,
	and
confidential
employees
as
stipulated
by
the
parties
and head
custodians L
(2) 	The following lfilit
is
folll.d
to
be
appropriate
for
	the
purpose
of
meeting and
negotiating
provided an employee
organization
becomes
	the
exclusive
representative:
Unit D
--
All operations-support services
employees
including
skilled crafts
employees; 	excluding
all
other
employees
including
management, 	supervisory, 	and
confidential
employees
as
stipulated
by
the
parties
and head custodians
I.
(3) 	Head custodians I
	are
folll.d
to
be
"supervisory"
employees
within
the
meaning
of
the
EERA.
The
parties
have seven (7) 	calendar days from
receipt of this
Proposed
Decision
in
which
to
file
exceptions
in
accordance
with Section 33380
of
the
PERB
Rules and Regulations.
	If
no
party
files
	timely exceptions,
	this
Proposed
Decision
will
become
final
on February 8, 1978, 	and a Notice
of
Decision
will issue
from
the
Board.
1vithin
ten	
(10) workdays
after
the employer posts the Notice
of
Decision,
each employee organization
shall
derronstrate
to the Regional Director
at least
30
percent support
in
each
of the above lll.its. 	The Regional Director
shall
conduct an election at
the end
of the posting period
if	
(1)
rore
than one
employee orga.~ization qualifies for the ballot, 	or 	(2) only one employee
organization qualifies for the ballot in
each lfilit and the employer does not
-14-

grant voluntary recognition. 	Vohm.tary recognition requires majority proof
of support in all cases. 	See Sections 3544 and 3544.1.
The date used to establish the number of employees in the above tmit
shall be the date of this decision unless another date is deemed appropriate
by the Regional Director and noticed to the parties. 	In the event another
date is selected, 	the Regional Director may extend the ti.Ire for employee
organizations to deironstrate at least 30 percent support in the unit.
Dated: 	January 27, 	1978
I
-15-
Kenneth A. Perea
Hearing Officer