|
|
| SEARCH THIS SITE |
|
|
| Teamsters
Local 633 of New Hampshire Plaistow Police Relief Association Complainant v. Town of Plaistow Respondent |
Case
No. P-0748-12 Decision No. 2001-040 |
|
PRE-HEARING MEMORANDUM and ORDER BACKGROUND On March 5, 2001, the Teamsters Local 633 of
New Hampshire, Plaistow Police Relief Association (hereinafter
referred to as the "Union") filed an improper labor
practice charge pursuant to RSA 273-A:3 and RSA 273-A:5 I (h)
alleging that the Town of Plaistow ( hereinafter referred to
as the "Town") and its agents failed to bargain in
good faith with the Union when its negotiator allegedly made
misrepresentations and false statements regarding Union
negotiation positions to the Board of Selectmen while the
Board of Selectmen were deciding upon the parameters for
negotiations and made misrepresentations to the Union
Negotiating Team at the table that he would
"re-approach" the Board of Selectmen in light of
certain salary and ranking data provided to him during
negotiations. The Union also claims that a failure to
negotiate in good faith occurred when a Selectman disparaged
the Union's negotiators to a member of the bargaining unit. The Union complaint seeks unspecified relief from the PELRB. The Town filed its answer on March 14, 2001
in which it denied the charges. It further responded that the
ground rules between the parties provide for communication
between the Town Negotiating Team and the Board of Selectmen
before and during negotiations and that such communication is
privileged and confidential. For her part, Selectman Senter
denies the statements attributed to her by the Union. Lastly,
the Town responds that the communication between the Town's
Negotiator and the Board of Selectmen on December 6, 2000 also
is privileged as is the Board Members' discussions relating to
the reaffirmation of the Town's parameters for negotiations. The Town asks that the Union's charges of unfair labor practice be dismissed or denied and that the Town be reimbursed by the Union for all expenses caused by its need to respond to the complaint. The matter was initially scheduled for a Pre-Hearing Conference on March 28, 2001. It was continued at the request of the Town after it obtained consent from the Union. It was not rescheduled until May 16, 2001 by mutual request of the parties. PARTICIPATING REPRESENTATIVES For the Union: Thomas D. Noonan, Business Agent and John D. Burke. Esq. For the District: Gary W. Wulf, Labor Relations Consultant ISSUE FOR DETERMINATION BY THE BOARD 1. Did the actions of the Town or any of its agents constitute a refusal of failure to bargain in good faith in breach of the parties' collective bargaining agreement or in violation of RSA 273-A:3 or RSA 273-A:5, I(e) WITNESSES For the Union (Complainant): EXHIBITS For the Union: LENGTH OF HEARING The time being set aside for this hearing as now consolidated with Case No. P-0748-11 is one day. If either party believes additional time is required, written notice of the need for additional time shall be filed with the PELRB no later than June 22, 2001. DECISION 1. By agreement of the parties, the instant matter and Case No. P-0748-11 shall be consolidated for purposes of the conduct of an evidentiary hearing. 2. The party representatives shall forward any amendments to their Witness and Exhibit lists detailed above to the opposing representative or counsel and to the PELRB no later than July 10, 2001, except as relates to the Union's identification of those members of the Board of Selectmen which it intends to call as witnesses. The identification and notification to the Town of those public officials shall be made by the Union no later than June 7, 2001 at 4:30 P.M. The party representatives shall meet, or otherwise arrange, to pre-mark all exhibits, for identification, prior to the time of hearing and have sufficient copies available for distribution at the hearing as required by Pub 203.02. 3. In the event that either of the parties deems it necessary to compel the attendance of any witness, that party shall do so in a timely fashion under either statutory or administrative regulatory rule. 4. Any additional preliminary, procedural or dispositive motions and memoranda of law shall be filed by the parties no later than fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing date with appropriate notice to the other parties of record. 5. Unless otherwise ordered as a result of
the filing of any subsequent motion, an evidentiary hearing
between the parties is scheduled to be conducted at the Office
of the Public Employee Labor Relations Board on Tuesday July
17, 2001 beginning at 9:30 A. M.
|
 |
 | |||||
|
|
|
|