|
|
| SEARCH THIS SITE |
|
|
| Town
of Brookline Petitioner v. Brookline Police Officers' Association Respondent |
Case No. P-0769-1 |
PRE-HEARING DECISION and
ORDER The Town of Brookline
(hereinafter referred to as the "Town") filed a Modification Petition on
December 12, 2001 seeking to modify the composition of a
certified bargaining unit by removing the position of Police
Sergeant on the basis of a "supervisory" exception.
On December 26, 2001 the Brookline Police Officers'
Association, (hereinafter referred to as the
"Association") filed its Objection that asserts,
in essence, that the Town's Modification Petition should be
dismissed as barred by the prohibition contained in Pub
302.05(b)(2) barring modifications if there have been no
changes in circumstances since an existing collective
bargaining agreement was negotiated. Further, the Association
objects to the Town's initiative before the PELRB while the
Town has an appeal pending before the Supreme Court that
involves a similar cause of action arising from the PELRB's
original certification of the bargaining unit. For the
Petitioner: James
M. McNamee, Esquire Also
present: Robert
Parodi, Esquire, Member of the Board of Selectmen 1. Whether or not the Town's Modification Petition should be dismissed by application of Pub 302.05(b)(2)? 2. Whether or not the
position of Police Sergeant is a "supervisory" position subject
to statutory exclusion from the existing bargaining unit? 2. For purposes of the hearing on the merits
of the modification of the unit, the parties stipulate that
there is an existing unit that has been certified by the PELRB
and that all information regarding the circumstances preceding
the certification of that unit is not relevant to the hearing
on the merits of the modification. 1. Thomas
Goulden, Police Chief For the Respondent: 1. Thomas
Goulden, Police Chief 1. Petition
for Certification For the Respondent: 1. Police
Sergeant job description (additional) The time being set aside for this hearing 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 within fifteen (15) days of the date of this
Order. 2. The Respondent has expressed its intention to file a Motion to Dismiss the Town's Modification petition based upon operation of Administrative Rule Pub 302.05(b)(2). Said Motion shall be filed no later than February 15, 2002 at 4:00 P.M. and a copy delivered in like manner to opposing counsel by that same date and time. Thereafter, the Town shall file its anticipated Objection no later than March 8, 2002 and inform opposing counsel in like manner. 3. The Town has expressed the possibility that it would attempt to introduce contents of various personnel files of employees within the Police Department. In the event that it maintains that intention, counsel for the Town shall contact opposing counsel to discuss the specific planned exhibits and counsel shall confer and agree to the redaction of as much unnecessary identifying data as may be possible and still result in a material exhibit. 4. The party representatives shall forward any amendments of their Witness and Exhibit lists detailed above to the opposing representative or counsel and to the PELRB no later than five (5) days prior to an evidentiary hearing. The party representatives shall meet, or otherwise arrange, to pre-mark any 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. 5. Any additional preliminary, procedural or dispositive motions shall be filed by the parties no later than twenty (20) calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing date. 6. 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 Friday, March
15, 2002 beginning at 9:30 A.M. /s/ Donald E. Mitchell |
 |
 | |||||
|
|
|
|