Unit Determination for Employees of the Regents of University of California (PERB A114H)

STATE OF CALIFOR NIA
DECISION OF THE
PUB LIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD
In the Matter of:
Unit Determination for Employees
of the Regents of the University
of California.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
. )
)
_____________________)
Case No. SF-RR-1002-H
et al.
PERB Order No. Ad- 114 -H
Administrative Appeal
(Interlocutory)
Se p tember 4, 1981
Appearances: Philip H. Weir for Independent Tool & Die
Craftsmen; Andrew Thomas Sinclair, Attorney for American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO,
Local 371; Patrick J. Szymanski, Attorney (Beeson, Tayer, Kovach
& Silbert) for Brotherhood of Teamsters and Auto Truck Drivers,
Local 70; Kenneth C. Absalom for California Nurses' Association;
Christine A. Bologna, Attorney for California State Employees
Association, California State Employees Association/Librarians,
California State Employees Association/Society of Professional
Scientists and Engineers; Douglas H. Barton, Attorney (Corbett,
Kane & Berk) for The Regents of the University of California;
David Novogrodsky for California State Employees
Association/Librarians; Lawrence Rosenzweig, Attorney (Levy &
Goldman) for International Union of Operating Engineers,
Local 501; Les Chisholm and Glenn Rothner, Attorney (Reich,
Adell & Crost) for American Federation of State, County &
Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO; Robert J. Bezemek, Attorney, (Van
Bour g, Allen, Weinberg & Ro ger) for Printing Trades Alliance,
Alameda County Building & Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO,
International Union of Operating Engineers, Stationary
Engineers, Local 39, Alameda County Building & Construction
Trades Council, AFL-CIO, & International Association of
Machinists & Aerospace Workers, Bay Area District Lodge No. 115,
AFL-CIO, Los Angeles County Employees Union, Local 434, SEIU,
AFL-CIO, San Francisco Building & Trades Council, University
Council, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, University
Council, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO, Local 14 7 4,
University Council, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO,
Local 1990, University Council, American Federation of Teachers,
AFL-CIO, Local 1966, United Health Care Employees, Local 102,

SEIU,
	AFL-CIO,
	United
	Health
	Care 	Employees,
	Local
	250,
	SEIU,
AFL-CIO,
	United
	Health
	Care
	Employees,
	Local
	535,
	SEIU, 	AFL-CIO,
United 	Health
	Care 	Employees,
	Local
	660,
	SEIU, 	AFL-CIO,
	United
Health
	Care 	Employees,
	Local
	434,
	SEIU, 	AFL-CIO.
Before:
	Gluck,
	Chairperson,
	Moore 	and
	Tovar,
	Members.
DECISION
On
	or
	about
	April
	24,
	1981,
	the
	parties
	to
	the
above-captioned 	cases 	entered
	into
	a
	stipulation
	requesting
	the
Public
	Employment
	Relations
	Board
	(hereafter
	Board
	or
	PERB)
	to
defer
	hearings
	on
	exclusionary
	issues
	until
	sometime
	following
issuance 	of
	the 	hearing
	officers'
	reco~endations
	on
	unit
configuration.
	On
	June 	2,
	1981,
	the
	Board
	requested
	that
	the
parties 	clarify
	the
	stipulation.
A
supplemental
	stipulation
	submitted
	by
	the
	parties
	on
June
	11, 	1981,
	requests
	that
	hearings
	on
	exclusionary
	issues
regarding 	negotiating 	units
	for 	nonprofessional
	employees
	of
the 	University 	of 	California	
be	
deferred
	until 	after
	the
issuance 	of 	the 	hearing
	officers'
	recommended
	decisions
	and
filing
	of
	briefs
	with 	the
	Board
	in
	response
	thereto.
	The
stipulation
	also
	states 	that,
	following 	post-hearing 	responses
to
	the 	hearing
	officers'
	recommended
	decisions
	on
	appropriate
units,
	the
	parties 	will
	meet
	in
	an
	attempt 	to 	resolve
	certain
exclusionary 	issues.
	In 	support 	of
	their
	suggested 	procedure,
the
	parties 	state 	that
	such 	delay
	will
	enable
	them
	to
	more
coherently
	develop
	positions 	regarding 	exclusionary 	issues
	and
enhance 	the
	potential
	for 	voluntary 	resolution 	of
	them.
2

The
	parties
	further
	suggest
	that
	the
	Board
	delay
	the
conduct 	of 	hearings
	until,
	following
	their
	efforts
	to
	narrow
the 	exclusionary
	issues,
	the
	parties
	request 	the
	Board
	to
conduct
	them.
Since
	the 	procedure 	proposed
	by
	the
	parties
	may
	allow
	the
exclusionary 	issues
	to
	be 	narrowed
	and
	thus
	result
	in
	a
	more
expeditious
	and
	economical
	processing
	of 	the
	cases,
	we
	grant
the
	stipulated
	request
	insofar
	as
	it
	requires
	that
	the
exclusionary
	hearings
	be
	deferred
	until
	issuance 	of 	the
	hearing
officers'
	recommended
	decisions
	on
	appropriate
	units
	and
receipt
	of
	briefs
	in
	response
	thereto.
	Following
	that
	event,
the
	chief 	administrative
	law
	judge
	shall
	determine
	when
	the
hearings
	on
	exclusionary 	issues 	will
	commencer
	in
	accordance
with
	established 	rules
	and
	procedures.
ORDER
The
	chief 	administrative
	law
	judge
	is 	directed
	to
	defer
hearings
	on
	exclusionary 	issues 	in 	the 	above-captioned 	cases
until
	the 	issuance 	of 	the 	hearing
	officers'
	recommended
decisions
	regarding 	appropriate 	units
	and
	the
	parties
	have 	had
an
	opportunity
	to 	respond
	thereto
	according 	to
	PERB
	rules.
After 	that
	time, 	the
	chief 	administrative
	law
	judge
	may
	proceed
3

with the conduct of representation hearings according to his
normal proc edure.
Irene Tovar, Member Barbara D. Moore, Member
4