|
|
| SEARCH THIS SITE |
|
|
| Monadnock
District Support Staff Association/NEA-NH Complainant v. Monadnock Regional School District Respondent |
Case
No. M-0752 Decision No. 1998-043
|
|
APPEARANCES Representing Monadnock District Support Staff Assoc., NEA-New
Hampshire: RepresentingMonadnock Regional School District: Also appearing: BACKGROUND On March 18, 1998, Monadnock District Support Staff
Association/NEA-New Hampshire filed a petition to certify a one hundred and
forty-eight member bargaining unit of support staff at the eight schools of the
Monadnock Regional School District. On March 16 and 25, 1998, the School
District answered stating its objections to the inclusion of any
secretarial positions. A hearing was held at the Public Employee Labor Relations
Board on April 24, 1998. The record was left open for two weeks for the
submission of certain evidence: an organizational chart and a job description
for secretaries. The District organizational chart FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Monadnock Regional School District (District) employs
teachers and support staff to operate its 2. The National Education Association (Association) has petitioned to become the exclusive bargaining agent for a bargaining unit to consist of the following positions: instructional assistants (88), tutors (20), library assistants (3), custodians (18), head custodians (1) and secretaries (13). Prior to the hearing, the parties agreed to the exclusion of the head custodian position. At the hearing, it was ascertained that the number of secretaries is twelve and that the sole dispute between the parties involved the inclusion of these twelve secretarial positions. The District objects to inclusion of secretaries alleging the confidential nature of their employment. 3. Association Exhibit No. 4 contains a list of the secretarial positions in question:
4. Secretaries in Monadnock Regional School District open all mail and are constantly handling sensitive information, about students' school and home lives which must be held confidential. Superintendent William Wheeler testified that they open mail about personnel matters within the school and may have access to labor relations documents. Dr. Wheeler expressed the concern that the principals must have trust in their secretaries and that introducing union membership may damage that relationship by shifting loyalties from the principal to the Association. Many of the principals are handling their own correspondence via E Mail. 5. Mary E. Gaul has been a UniServ director for the Monadnock School District for NEA/NH for thirteen years and has been a member of the negotiating team for several collective bargaining agreements for the teachers' bargaining unit. The District has been represented in bargaining by professional negotiators. Ms. Gaul has never known a principal to play a role in negotiations and only occasionally has any member of the administration offered information for the negotiations process. Then, it has been Superintendent Wheeler or the prior business manager, Mr. Minton, who has been consulted in bargaining by the professional negotiators. 6. Amy Jeanne Lawrence testified that she is a tutor at the Cutler School in Swansea and is president of the Monadnock District Support Staff Association. At Cutler, the guidance counselor, rather than the secretary, steps in when the principal is absent. On information and belief, Ms. Lawrence testified that the principal keeps confidential records in his personal computer and the secretary at Cutler School does not have any greater access to confidential personnel records than does any other member of the staff. Principal David Bell wrote a letter for the paraprofessionals to say that the Cutler School secretary keeps time and attendance records but does not have access to supervision or personnel records of other employees at Cutler. (Association No. 6). M. E. Gaul advised that secretaries are excluded by the teachers' collective bargaining agreement from teachers' disciplinary hearings. DECISION AND ORDER RSA 273-A:8 places authority to determine the composition of
bargaining units with the Public Employee Labor Relations Board. Employees whose
duties imply a confidential relationship to the public employer must be excluded
from bargaining units. RSA 273-A:l IX (c). A request for the exclusion of a
position because of The District has asked for a blanket exclusion of all twelve
secretaries who work in District schools citing foremost concerns for
confidentiality of student records and for trust and harmony between secretaries
and the administrators for whom the secretaries work. The nature of the
confidential exclusion sought by the District is much broader than the limited
definition of "confidential" addressed in the statute. The
"confidential relationship" that forms the basis for exclusion from a
bargaining unit is a confidential relationship to one who carries out or is
closely involved in labor negotiations. See Plainfield Support Staff, NEA New
Hampshire V. Plainfield School District, Decision No. 1997-128 (December 30,
1997). In that case, the secretary to the school principal was excluded because
her job infers a confidential relationship to the only principal in the
District. That principal regularly directly advises negotiators and the school
board on labor relations matters. None of the job descriptions for secretarial
positions submitted at the hearing supports exclusion for reasons of
confidentiality (Association Exhibits No. 1, 2 and 3). The job description of
administrative assistant, sent in lieu of the job description for secretary,
does not support exclusion of that Testimony at the hearing was general and there was no testimony offered from a secretary or a principal. Superintendent Wheeler averred that secretaries open all mail for the principals and so come in contact with information on labor negotiations. The Superintendent posed a hypothetical situation to illustrate how this might occur. He testified that principals may be asked by letter to provide a response or calculate the impact when a change may result from a proposal in negotiations. However, providing non-confidential facts or figures which might later be used by negotiators has not been considered protected by RSA 273-A. Superintendent Wheeler agreed that E Mail, which by-passes the secretaries, is in use by most principals. When warranted, a stamp may be used to mark a hard copy as a confidential communication. No showing has been made that allowing secretaries into the bargaining unit will pose an impermissible hindrance to the public employer. Appeal of Laconia, 135 NH 421, 424-5 (1992).
So ordered. Signed this 22nd day of May, 1998
/s/ Gail C. Morrison |
![]() |
![]() | |||||
|
|
|
|