Greenfield Union School District (PERB 0035E)

)
____________ )
STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE EDUCATIONAL
EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
)
GREENFIELD UNION 	SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Employer,
,
and
CALIFORNIA SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION DEL KERN, 	CHAPTER 496,
Employee 	Organization,
and
KERN COUNTY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,
SEIU, LOCAL 700, AFL-CIO,
Employee 	Organization.
)
)
)
} 	Case 	No. 	LA-R-21
EERB Decision No. 35
October 	25, 	1977
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	Richard Anthony, 	Attorney, 	for Greenfield Union
School District; 	Mary Ruth Gross, 	Attorney, 	for California
School Employee Association Del Kern, 	Chapter 496; 	A.G. 	Logsdon,
for Kern County Employees Association, 	SEIU Local 	700, 	AFL-CIO.
Before Alleyne, 	Chairman; 	Gonzales and Cossack, 	Members.
OPINION
The 	Board has 	considered 	the 	record 	and 	the 	attached 	decision
in 	light 	of 	the 	exceptions 	and briefs 	of 	the 	parties 	and has
decided 	to 	affirm 	the findings 	of 	the hearing officer.
Accordingly, 	the 	decision 	as 	modified herein 	and 	the 	recommended
order 	are 	adopted.
We note 	that 	the number of employees 	(however 	small) 	is not,
alone, 	a basis 	for 	concluding 	that a wall-to-wall unit 	is
appropriate. 	However, 	the number of employees 	in a district may
-1-

be 	so 	small 	that 	a 	district, 	as 	a 	consequence, 	may have
assigned 	to 	employees 	interchangeable 	functions 	and parallel
working 	conditions 	that 	are 	consistent 	with 	the 	community 	of
interest 	required 	to 	find 	appropriate 	a 	wall-to-wall 	unit
under 	the Act ' s 	unit 	criteria. 	Additionally, 	there may be 	a
situation where 	the 	number 	of 	employees 	is 	so 	small 	that 	to
find 	other 	than 	a 	wall-to-wall 	unit may 	adversely 	affect 	the
efficient 	operations 	of 	the 	school 	district. 	While 	future
cases 	reaching 	the 	Board may present 	facts 	of 	the 	kind noted
herein, 	this 	case 	does not .
· By( 	Raymond 	J. 	Gonzales, 	Member 	Reginald Alleyne, 	Chairman
. 	,.
Jerilou H. 	Cossack, 	Member, 	concurring :
In prior 	cases 	we 	have 	sought 	to 	balance 	the 	criteria
enunciated by 	Section 	3545(a) . 1 We 	have 	thus 	established
presumptively 	appropriate 	units 	in 	the 	classified 	service. 	The
District 	argues 	in 	this 	case 	that 	the 	small 	number 	of 	classified
employees, 	alone, 	warrants 	departure 	from our 	established
precedent. 	However, 	the 	District 	has 	not 	demonstrated 	that 	the
small 	number 	of 	employees 	has 	in 	any way 	resulted 	in 	a 	different
•"'<DI. 	Code Sec. 	3545 (a) 	states:
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 	operation 	of 	the 	school 	district .
(Emphasis 	added . )
-2-

administrative 	structure 	or 	otherwise 	had 	any 	effect 	on 	its
operations .
While 	some 	small 	school 	districts 	may have 	fewer 	management
and 	supervisory 	employees 	with broader 	responsibility 	than 	that
found 	in 	larger 	districts, 	the 	record 	in 	this 	case 	is 	silent .
Nor 	is 	there 	any evidence 	that 	the 	s mall 	number 	of 	employees 	has
caused 	the 	District 	to 	utilize 	other 	public 	entities, 	such 	as
county bookkeeping 	services, 	to 	perform functions 	normally
performed by district 	employees 	in 	larger 	districts. 	Further,
it 	is 	entirely possible 	that 	in 	a 	district with 	a 	s mall 	number
of 	employees 	the 	employees 	perform 	interchangeable 	functions,
have 	common 	supervision 	or 	regularly 	transfer between 	classifi-
cations; 	however, 	the District 	did not 	establish 	that 	any of
these 	conditions 	were met 	here.
I 	a m reluctant, 	in 	the 	absence 	of 	any 	evidence 	of 	the 	effect
of 	the 	small 	number 	of 	employees 	on 	the 	District's 	operations, 	to
find 	that 	an 	arbitrary number mandates 	a 	wall-to-wall 	unit 	when
in 	all 	other 	respects 	this 	District 	is 	not 	distinguishable 	fro m
others 	in which we 	have 	found multiple 	units 	to be 	presumptively
appropriate. 	Accordingly, 	I 	affirm 	the 	order 	of 	the 	hearing 	officer ~
( 	I 	.
~ 	r1lou H. 	Cossack, 	Member
-3-

EDUCATIONAL 	EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS 	BOARD
OF 	THE 	STATE OF 	CALIFORNIA
In 	the Matter of:
GREENFIELD UNION 	SCHOOL DISTRICT,
Employer,
and
CALIFORNIA 	SCHOOL 	EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION DEL KERN, 	Chapter 496,
Employee Organization,
and
KERN COUNTY EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,
SEIU, 	Local 700, AFL-CIO,
Employee 	Organization
)
)
)
)
) 	Case No. 	LA-R-21
PROPOSED 	DECISION
June 	1, 	1977
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Appearances: 	Richard Anthony, 	Attorney, for Greenfield Union School
District; 	Mary Ruth Gross, 	Attorney, 	for California School Employee
Association Del Kern,Chapter 496; 	A. 	G. 	Logsdon, 	for Kern County
Employees Association, 	SEIU Local 700, 	AFL-CIO.
Before Silvia M. 	Diaz, 	Hearing Officer.
OPINION
PROCEDURAL 	HISTORY
On April 	1, 	1976, 	Kern County Employees Association, 	SEIU Local
700, 	AFL-CIO 	(S.E.I.U.) 	filed a request 	for recognition with 	the
Greenfield Union 	School District 	(School 	District) 	for a unit 	of
approximately 28 employees. 1 On April 	21, 	1976, 	California School
Employees Association Del Kern, 	Chapter 	496 	(CSEA) 	filed a request
for 	recognition 	for 	all 	classified 	employees 	excluding 	noon 	duty
1 	SEIU sought recognition for bus 	driver, 	custodian, 	head 	custodian,
head mechanic, 	groundsman, 	junior groundsman, 	junior maintenance man,
senior maintenance man and 	junior mechanic.

supervisors, 	management, 	supervisory and confidential 	employees,2
a unit 	of 	approximately 	74 	employees.
On May 3, 	1976, 	the School District filed its response indi-
cating 	that 	they 	doubted 	the 	appropriateness 	of 	the 	unit 	sought by
SEIU. 	A hearing was held on September 	2 	and 	27, 	1976. 	At 	the 	start
of 	the hearing, 	SEIU sought 	to 	amend its 	petition to 	add food 	services
employees 	including 	cafeteria manager and 	cafeteria helper. 	The 	School
District 	objected but 	later withdrew its 	objection. 	This 	amended unit
consists 	of 	approximately 	48 	employees.
The parties 	stipulated 	that 	the 	following positions 	are 	confiden-
tial: 	Administrative secretary, 	financial secretary, 	secretary-book-
keeper, 	secretary-receptionist 	and 	secretary 	to 	the 	principal who will
be 	designated 	on 	the management bargaining 	team 	to bargain with 	class-
ified 	employees. 	That 	stipulation 	is 	accepted without 	inquiry.
ISSUE
What 	is 	the 	appropriate unit 	or units 	for bargaining?
DISCUSSION
Greenfield 	Union 	School 	District has 	an 	average 	daily 	attendance
of 	2,924 	attending four kindergarten 	through 	sixth 	grade 	elementary
schools 	and a junior high 	covering 	grades 	seven 	and 	eight. 	The 	ad-
ministration building 	is 	on a 	separate 	site 	from the 	schools. 	The bus
garage 	and maintenance yard 	are 	located at 	the 	same 	site 	as 	the 	ad-
ministration building. 	Large 	equipment 	is 	stored at 	this 	site.
2 	CSEA's 	request 	included job 	groupings 	of 	transportation, 	food services,
clerical 	and 	secretarial, 	maintenance 	and operations 	including 	cus-
todians, 	maintenance and grounds.
- 2 -

Custodians 	and head 	custodians 	report 	to 	the building where
they 	are 	employed. 	Groundsmen and maintenance 	employees 	report 	to
the maintenance yard 	for equipment 	and 	then 	to 	school 	sites. 	The
head 	and 	junior mechanics 	report 	to 	the maintenance yard 	and remain
there 	for 	the workday. 	Bus 	drivers 	report 	to 	the maintenance yard.
For 	3 	1/2 to 4 hours per day, 	they drive a bus; 	the balance of 	the day,
they clean, 	haul, 	paint, 	and work with grounds, 	maintenance or mechanics
as 	do 	custodians when school 	is not 	in session. 	There are no educa-
tional 	requirements for 	these positions. 	These positions 	are all
supervised by 	the 	director 	of maintenance, 	operations and 	transporta-
tion. 	These 	employees work year round.
The 	director 	of 	food 	services 	supervises 	the 	cafeteria helpers
and cafeteria managers. 	There 	are approximately 	3 to 3 	1/2 	food
services 	employees who report 	to 	each 	school 	site. 	These 	employees
prepare 	and service 	food and clean and do 	inventory. 	They work 	1 to 2
days 	before 	school 	starts 	and one 	day 	after 	school 	ends 	and are paid
hourly for 4, 	6 	or 	8 hours per 	day.
Teacher 	aides 	and 	library 	aides 	are 	supervised by 	a 	school
principal 	and 	assigned 	to work with 	certificated personnel. 	They
generally work 	the 	days school 	is 	in 	session. 	There 	is 	no 	educational
requirement. 	Estimates 	are 	that 	75-90% have graduated from high
school, 	and 	some have 	attended or 	graduated from college.
Clerical 	employees 	are 	generally 	ten month 	employees 	who 	are
employed at 	a 	school 	site 	or 	the 	administration building 	and 	super-
vised by 	a principal 	or 	administrator.
- 3 -

In 	Sweetwater,3 	the 	Board 	established 	presumptively 	appropriate
units 	for 	classified 	employees. 	An operations-support 	services 	unit
including 	transportation, 	custodial, 	gardening, 	maintenance and cafeteria
employees 	was 	found 	appropriate based 	on 	community 	of 	interest 	under
Government Code 	Section 3545 	(a). 	Criteria 	for 	determining 	community
of 	interest 	include 	work 	functions, supervision, 	compensation and work
hours.
As 	in Sweetwater, 	the primary work 	functions 	of 	the operations-
support 	services employees 	herein 	all 	involve providing 	a proper
physical 	environment 	and 	support 	services 	for 	students. 	The 	employees
in 	the unit 	sought by 	SEIU drive 	and repair buses, 	prepare 	and 	serve
meals,and 	perform janitorial, 	grounds 	and general maintenance work 	at
district 	facilities.
Supervision 	for 	operations-support 	services 	employees 	is 	by 	the
director 	of maintenance, 	operations and 	transportation 	and 	the 	director
of 	food services. 	While 	there 	is crossover 	in 	the 	functions 	of 	the
two 	assistant 	superintendents,generally, 	the 	superintendent 	for 	ad-
ministration and business 	services 	supervises the 	director 	of main-
tenance, 	operations 	and 	transportation and 	the 	director of 	food
services. 	By contract, 	teacher aides, 	library aides 	and secretaries
are 	supervised by 	principals 	or 	administrators who 	generally 	report
to 	the 	superintendent 	for 	instructional 	programs.
Compensation 	is based on an hourly rate 	for 	all 	classified 	em-
ployees. 	Most 	classified employees work eight hours 	per 	day. 	Some
cafeteria workers work 	four or 	six. 	Nearly all 	clerical 	employees,
teacher aides, 	library 	aides 	and 	cafeteria 	employees work 	the 	school
3 	Sweetwater Union High School District, 	EERB 	Decision No. 	4,
November 23, 19 76.
- 4 -

year or 	ten months. 	Thus 	compensation and hours 	are not 	determina-
tive 	of 	community of 	interest.
Based 	on work 	functions 	and 	supervision, 	the 	operations-support
services 	unit 	is 	found 	to be 	appropriate.
The 	extent 	to which 	employees belong 	to 	the 	same organization
is 	not 	determinative. 	While 	a 	substantial number of food 	services
employees 	belong 	to 	CSEA, 	the 	record does 	not reflect how many of
SEIU's members 	are employees 	in food services. 	Further, 	no organiza-
tion has 	ever 	represented 	classified 	employees 	in 	this 	School 	District
in 	its 	employer-employee relations. 	Thus, 	membership 	does 	not
evidence 	established practices 	in this 	case.
This 	School District 	argues 	that because 	it 	is 	a 	small 	district,
a wall 	to wall unit 	is 	appropriate. 	There 	are 	110 	classified employees
in 	this 	School District. 	The 	operations-support 	services 	unit 	contains
48 	employees. 	This 	is not a case where 	the number of employees 	is
so minute 	as 	to 	render 	the negotiations 	and 	administration of more
than 	one 	agreement 	a 	serious 	impediment 	to 	efficient 	operation 	of
the School District.
The 	remaining 	classified 	employees 	in 	Greenfield 	Union 	School
District 	constitute 	a 	second negotiating unit. 	No 	party presented
evidence 	indicating 	that 	the residual 	unit was 	inappropriate. 	There-
fore, 	it is not found inappropriate.
PROPOSED 	DECISION
It 	is 	the proposed decision that:
1. 	The 	following units 	are 	appropriate 	for purposes 	of meeting
and negotiating, 	providing 	an employee organization becomes 	the 	ex-
clusive representative 	of 	the unit:
- 5 -

Unit A: 	Operations-support 	services 	unit 	including 	the
following classifications: 	custodian, 	head custodian, 	head mechanic,
junior mechanic, 	senior maintenance man, 	junior maintenance man,
bus 	driver, 	groundsman, 	junior groundsman, 	cafeteria manager, 	cafeteria
helper, 	excluding 	all 	other 	employees 	including noon 	duty 	supervisors,
management, 	supervisory and 	confidential 	employees.
Unit B: 	All 	classified employees 	not 	included in Unit A, 	ex-
cluding all 	employees 	in Unit A, 	noon duty supervisors, 	management,
supervisory 	and 	confidential 	employees.
The 	parties 	have 	seven 	calendar 	days 	from receipt 	of 	this 	pro-
posed 	decision 	in which 	to 	file 	exceptions 	in accordance with 	Section
33380 	of 	8 California Administrative Code. 	If no party 	files 	timely
exceptions, 	this 	proposed 	decision will become 	a 	final 	order 	of 	the
Board on June 	13, 	1977 	and a Notice of Decision will 	issue 	from the
Board.
Within 	ten workdays 	after 	the 	employer 	posts 	the Notice 	of Decision
the 	employee 	organizations 	shall 	demonstrate 	to 	the Regional 	Director
at 	least 	30 	percent 	support 	in 	the 	above unit. 	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 	and 	the 	employer
does 	not 	grant voluntary recognition.
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
-6-

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 .
Dated: 	June 	1, 	1977 .
-7-
/ 	7 	(I
Sharrel J . 	Wyatt
Hearing 	Officer