Unit Determination - California State University and Colleges (Nonprofessional) (PERB 0176HA)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DECISION OF THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
In the Matter of:
Case No. 	LA-PC-1001
LA-PC-1002
Unit Determination for Employees
of the California State University LA-PC-1003
LA-PC-1004
and Colleges Pursuant to Chapter 744
of the Statutes of 1978 (Higher
Education Employer-Employee
LA-PC-1005
Relations Act) 	PERB Decision No. 176a-H
Request for Reconsideration
May 26, 1982
Appearances: Bernard L. Allamano, Gary P. Reynolds, M. Jeffrey
Fine and Christine A. Bologna, Attorneys for California State
Employees Association; Mayer Chapman and Barbara E. Miller,
Attorneys for California State University and Colleges.
Before Gluck, Chairperson; Jaeger, Jensen and Tovar, Members.
DECISION
Pursuant to section 32410 of the rules and regulations of
the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB or Board) , _ the
PERB rules and regulations are codified at California
Administrative Code, title 8, section 31000 et seq.
Section 32410 (a) states:
(a) Any party to a decision of the Board
itself may, because of extraordinary
circumstances, file a request to reconsider
the decision with the Board itself within
10 days following the date of service of the
decision. The request for reconsideration
shall be filed with the Executive Assistant
STATE
	OF
	CALIFORNIA
DECISION
	OF
	THE
PUBLIC
	EMPLOYMENT
	RELATIONS
	BOARD
In
	the
	Matter
	of:
Unit
	Determination 	for
	Employees
of
	the
	California 	State 	University
and
	Colleges 	Pursuant 	to
	Chapter
	744
of
	the
	Statutes
	of
	1978
	(Higher
Education
	Employer-Employee
Relations
	Act)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
____________________ )
Case
	No. 	LA-PC-1001
LA-PC-1002
LA-PC-1003
LA-PC-1004
LA-PC-1005
PERB
	Decision
	No.
	176a-H
Request
	for 	Reconsideration
May
	26, 	1982
Appearances: 	Bernard
	L.
	Allamano,
	Gary
	P. 	Reynolds,	
M.	
Jeffrey
Fine
	and
	Christine
	A.
	Bologna,
	Attorneys 	for
	California 	State
Employees
	Association;
	Mayer 	Chapman 	and
	Barbara
	E.
	Miller,
Attorneys 	for
	California 	State 	University
	and
	Colleges.
Before 	Gluck,
	Chairperson;
	Jaeger,
	Jensen
	and
	Tovar,
	Members.
DECISION
Pursuant 	to
	section
	32410
	of
	the
	rules
	and
	regulations 	of
the 	Public
	Employment
	Relations
	Board
	(PERB
	or 	Board),
1
the
1	
PERB
	rules
	and
	regulations 	are 	codified
	at
	CaliforniaAdministrative
	Code,
	title
	8,
	section
	31000
	et
	seq.
Section
	32410(a)
	states:
(a) 	Any
	party 	to
	a
	decision 	of 	the
	Board
itself
	may,
	because
	of 	extraordinarycircumstances,
	file
	a
	request 	to 	reconsiderthe 	decision 	with 	the
	Board
	itself
	within
10 	days 	following 	the 	date 	of 	service 	of 	the
decision.
	The
	request 	for 	reconsideration
shall
	be
	filed
	with 	the 	Executive 	Assistant

California State Employees Association (CSEA) seeks
reconsideration of PERB Decision No. 176-H. In that decision
we determined, inter alia, that the supervising groundsworker I
employment classification of the California State Universities
and Colleges (CSUC) is a supervisory classification, and that
the appropriate representational unit for certain agricultural
and technical classifications of CSUC could not be determined
based upon the record of the underlying administrative
proceeding .
In deciding the exclusionary status of the supervising
groundsworker I, the Board adopted and relied upon those
findings of fact which were based upon credibility
determinations of the hearing officer who presided at the
underlying administrative proceeding. It was in the evaluation
of those findings that the Board reached a result contrary to
that recommended by the hearing officer. We note that only one
witness at the unit determination proceeding testified
regarding the classification of supervising groundsworker I.
Thus the testimony as to this employment position was
uncontroverted. Independent review of the uncontroverted facts
to the Board and shall state with
specificity the grounds claimed and, where
applicable, shall specify the page of the
record relied on. Service and proof of
service of the request pursuant to Section
32140 are required.
N
California
	State
	Employees
	Association
	(CSEA)
	seeks
reconsideration
	of
	PERB
	Decision
	No.
	176-H.
	In
	that 	decision
we
	determined,
	inter
	alia,
	that
	the
	supervising
	groundsworker
	I
employment
	classification
	of 	the
	California 	State 	Universities
and
	Colleges
	(CSUC)
	is
	a
	supervisory
	classification,
	and
	that
the
	appropriate
	representational 	unit
	for
	certain 	agricultural
and
	technical
	classifications
	of
	CSUC
	could 	not
	be
	determined
based
	upon
	the 	record 	of 	the 	underlying
	administrative
proceeding.
to 	the
	Board 	and
	shall 	state
	with
specificity
	the 	grounds 	claimed 	and, 	where
applicable, 	shall 	specify 	the
	page
	of 	the
record
	relied
	on. 	Service
	and
	proof 	of
service 	of 	the 	request 	pursuant 	to 	Section
32140
	are 	required.
In
	deciding 	the
	exclusionary
	status
	of
	the
	supervising
groundsworker
	I,
	the
	Board
	adopted
	and
	relied
	upon
	those
findings 	of
	fact
	which 	were
	based
	upon
	credibility
determinations 	of
	the
	hearing
	officer
	who
	presided
	at
	the
underlying
	administrative
	proceeding.
	It
	was
	in 	the
	evaluation
of 	those
	findings
	that
	the
	Board
	reached
	a
	result
	contrary 	to
that
	recommended 	by
	the 	hearing
	officer.
	We
	note
	that
	only
	one
witness
	at
	the
	unit 	determination 	proceeding
	testified
regarding 	the
	classification
	of 	supervising
	groundsworker
	I.
Thus
	the 	testimony 	as 	to
	this
	employment
	position
	was
uncontroverted. 	Independent 	review
	of
	the 	uncontroverted
	facts
2

is entirely within the Board's authority and does not evidence
a disregard of firsthand credibility determinations.
The Board also considered, inter alia, its decision in In
the Matter of Unit Determination for the State of California
(12/30/80), PERB Decision No. 110c-S. While we concluded in
that decision that the state civil service classification of
supervising groundsworker I is nonsupervisory, the record in
the instant unit determination proceeding does not contain
evidence establishing that this state classification is the
same as the CSUC classification of the same name.
In deciding that a group of 50 agricultural and technical
employees of CSUC could not for the moment be included in any
representational unit, the Board found that the record was
entirely without evidence as to certain agricultural and
technical classifications. Thus, a rational decision regarding
the appropriate composition of a representational unit of
agricultural and technical employees was not possible. CSEA
has not submitted any evidence to supplement the deficiency in
the record, thus our conclusion must remain the same.
Having shown no "extraordinary circumstances" within the
meaning of section 32410, the California State Employees
Association's request for reconsideration is DENIED.
PER CURIAM
W
is
	entirely
	within
	the
	Board's
	authority
	and
	does
	not 	evidence
a
	disregard
	of
	firsthand
	credibility
	determinations.
The
	Board
	also 	considered,
	inter
	alia, 	its
	decision 	in
	In
the 	Matter
	of
	Unit
	Determination 	for
	the
	State
	of
	California
(12/30/80),
	PERB
	Decision
	No.
	llOc-S.
	While
	we
	concluded
	in
that
	decision
	that
	the
	state
	civil
	service
	classification
	of
supervising
	groundsworker
	I
	is
	nonsupervisory,
	the 	record 	in
the
	instant
	unit
	determination
	proceeding
	does
	not
	contain
evidence
	establishing
	that 	this 	state 	classification 	is
	the
same
	as 	the
	CSUC
	classification
	of 	the
	same 	name.
In
	deciding
	that
	a
	group
	of
	50
	agricultural
	and
	technical
employees
	of
	CSUC
	could 	not 	for 	the
	moment 	be
	included 	in
	any
representational 	unit,
	the
	Board 	found
	that
	the 	record
	was
entirely
	without
	evidence 	as 	to
	certain 	agricultural
	and
technical
	classifications.
	Thus,
	a
	rational
	decision 	regarding
the
	appropriate
	composition
	of
	a
	representational 	unit
	of
agricultural
	and
	technical
	employees
	was
	not
	possible.
	CSEA
has
	not 	submitted
	any
	evidence 	to 	supplement 	the
	deficiency 	in
the 	record, 	thus
	our
	conclusion
	must 	remain
	the
	same.
ORDER	ORDER
Having 	shown 	no
	"extraordinary 	circumstances" 	within 	the
meaning
	of 	section
	32410,
	the
	California 	State
	Employees
Association's 	request 	for 	reconsideration 	is
	DENIED.
PER CURIAM
3