MSEA v. State of Maine, Dept. of Public Safety, 97-UC-02C, 
appeal dismissed 98-UCA-01.

STATE OF MAINE                        MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
                                      Case No. 97-UC-02C
                                      Issued:  November 6, 1997  


____________________________________
                                    )
MAINE STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,  )
LOCAL 1989, SEIU,                   )
                                    )
  Bargaining Agent and Petitioner,  )
                                    )
     and                            )     UNIT CLARIFICATION 
                                    )           REPORT
STATE OF MAINE, DEPARTMENT OF       )
PUBLIC SAFETY,                      )      
                                    ) 
                  Public Employer.  )
____________________________________) 


                           INTRODUCTION

     This is a unit clarification proceeding that was initiated
on January 21, 1997, when Jack Hunt, Esq., a representative of
the Maine State Employees Association, Local 1989, SEIU,
(hereinafter referred to as "Union"), filed a petition for unit
clarification with the Maine Labor Relations Board ("Board")
pursuant to section 979-E(3) of the State Employees Labor
Relations Act ("Act" or "SELRA"), 26 M.R.S.A. ch. 9-B.  The
Union's petition sought to have the seven employees in the
position of Public Safety Inspector I in the Department of Public
Safety who were formerly classified as Fire Inspectors ("former
Fire Inspectors") reassigned from the Administrative Services
bargaining unit to the Law Enforcement Services bargaining unit.

     Prior to commencement of the formal hearing, the parties met
with the hearing examiner to explore the possibility of settle-
ment and, in the alternative, to offer exhibits into evidence and
formulate stipulations of fact.
 
                             HEARING

     After due notice an evidentiary hearing on the petition was
held by the undersigned hearing examiner on August 14, 1997, at
the Board's conference room in Augusta, Maine.  Jack Hunt, Esq., 

                               -1-
_________________________________________________________________

appeared on behalf of the Maine State Employees Association. 
Sandra S. Carraher, Esq., appeared on behalf of the Department of
Public Safety ("Employer").  No one requested to intervene.

     The Union presented as its witnesses:  Ms. Sue Dion and
Mr. Doug Castiglia, both Public Safety Inspector I's.  The
Employer presented as its witness:  Mr. Gary Mather, Personnel
Manager for the Department of Public Safety.

     The parties were given the opportunity to examine and cross-
examine witnesses, offer evidence and present oral argument at
the close of the hearing.


                          JURISDICTION
                                    
     The Maine State Employees Association is the certified
bargaining agent and the State of Maine is the public employer
within the meaning of section 979-A.  The jurisdiction of the
hearing examiner to hear this matter and make a unit
clarification decision lies in 26 M.R.S.A.  979-E(3).


                            EXHIBITS

     The parties agreed to the admission of the following joint
exhibits:

Joint Exhibit #1    Public Safety Inspector I Job Specifications

Joint Exhibit #2    1978-1980 Professional and Technical Services
                    Bargaining Unit Collective Bargaining
                    Agreement, list of classifications in unit   
                    (classifications not in original unit
                    determination noted)

Joint Exhibit #3    1978-1980 Law Enforcement Services Bargaining
                    Unit Collective Bargaining Agreement, list of
                    classifications in unit (classifications not
                    in original unit determination noted)

Joint Exhibit #4    1978-1980 Administrative Services Bargaining
                    Unit Collective Bargaining Agreement, list of
                    classifications in unit (classifications not
                    in original unit determination noted)

Joint Exhibit #5    1997-1999 Law Enforcement Services Bargaining
                    
                                    -2-
_________________________________________________________________

                    Unit Collective Bargaining Agreement

Joint Exhibit #6    M.L.R.B. Notice of Agreement on Appropriate
                    Bargaining Unit (Form 1) Reassigning
                    Campground Ranger from the Law               
                    Enforcement Services Unit to the Operations,
                    Maintenance and Support Services Unit

Joint Exhibit #7    1997-1999 Administrative Services Bargaining
                    Unit Collective Bargaining Agreement, list of
                    classifications in unit

Joint Exhibit #8    Class Specifications for 10 positions in
                    Administrative Services Unit (selected by
                    State on basis of job titles being the same
                    as in the original unit determination): 
                    Dairy Inspector, Field Inspector, Jail
                    Inspector, Oil Burner Inspector, Plumbing
                    Inspector, Produce Inspector I, Produce
                    Inspector II, Seed Potato Inspector, Senior
                    Plumbing Inspector, and Weights & Measures
                    Inspector

Joint Exhibit #9    Class Specifications for all current
                    positions in Law Enforcement Services Unit
                    (all that State could locate):  Baxter Park
                    Ranger I, Capitol Security Police Officer,
                    Capitol Security Police Sergeant, Fire
                    Investigator, Forest Ranger I, Forest Ranger
                    II, Forest Ranger III, Game Warden, Game
                    Warden Assistant, Game Warden Investigator,
                    Game Warden Pilot, Game Warden Specialist,
                    Liquor Enforcement Officer I, Marine Patrol
                    Officer, Marine Patrol Pilot, Motor Vehicle
                    Investigator, Probation Officer, Probation-
                    Parole Officer II, Ranger Pilot, Special
                    Agent Investigator, and Special Investigator

Joint Exhibit #10   1997-1999 Professional and Technical Services
                    Bargaining Unit Collective Bargaining
                    Agreement, list of classifications in unit

Joint Exhibit #11   Class Specifications for 7 positions in
                    Professional and Technical Services Unit
                    (selected by State on basis of job titles    
                    being the same as in the original unit
                    determination): Compliance Officer, Field
                    Examiner II, Field Investigator, Fraud       
                    Investigator, Labor & Safety Inspector,
                    Safety Compliance Officer and Tax Examiner

Joint Exhibit #12   Class Specifications for 3 positions in
                    Professional and Technical Services Unit     
               
                               -3-
_________________________________________________________________

                    (selected by State as job titles not in
                    the original unit determination):            
                    Environmental Specialist II, Securities      
                    Specialist and Human Services Enforcement    
                    Agent

Joint Exhibit #13   Job Evaluation Report on Public Safety
                    Inspector I (currently in a reallocation
                    appeal)

Joint Exhibit #14   "FJA" dated Jan. 31, 1996, creating the
                    Public Safety Inspector I classification
                    (8 pp.)

Joint Exhibit #15   "FJA" dated May 30, 1996, placing the former
                    Fire Inspectors into the Public Safety
                    Inspector I classification (6 pp.)

Joint Exhibit #16   Memo dated July 1, 1996, from John H. Alden,
                    Merit System Coord. to Gary Mather, Personnel
                    Mgr., Dept. of Public Safety

Joint Exhibit #17   5-page excerpt of Dept. of Public Safety
                    Submission to the Productivity Realization
                    Task Force

Joint Exhibit #18   Identification Badge of an incumbent
                    inspector issued by Fire Marshal's Office

Joint Exhibit #19   Identification Badge of a former fire
                    investigator issued by Fire Marshal's Office
 
Joint Exhibit #20   State Fire Marshal's Office organizational
                    chart prior to Productivity Realization Task
                    Force changes

Joint Exhibit #21   Job Posting for Fire Investigator dated
                    July 30, 1996

Joint Exhibit #22   Oath of Office for Fire Inspector

Joint Exhibit #23   Application for Administrative Search Warrant

Joint Exhibit #24   Fire Inspector Class Specifications dating
                    from 1972 to 1994

Joint Exhibit #25   Fire Investigator Class Specifications dating
                    from Dec. 1982 to Nov. 1992

Joint Exhibit #26   1993-1995 Law Enforcement Services Bargaining
                    Unit Collective Bargaining Agreement

                               -4-
_________________________________________________________________

                           STIPULATIONS

     1.  The petitioner, the Maine State Employees Association,
is the certified bargaining agent within the meaning of section
979-A(1) for the state employee Administrative Services, Law
Enforcement Services, and Professional and Technical Services
bargaining units.

     2.  The State of Maine is the public employer within the
meaning of section 979-A(5) of all of the employees whose
classification is at issue here today.

     3.  The parties have been unable to agree on the modifica-
tion being sought through the petition and there is no question
concerning representation.

     4. Substantial change has occurred in that a new
classification called Public Safety Inspector I was created on or
about February 1, 1996.  The incumbents were reclassified to the
new classification effective on or about June 17, 1996, and MSEA
was informed of the reclassification on or about July 1, 1996.

     5. The position of Fire Inspector existing in 1976 was split
into two positions, Fire Inspector and Fire Investigator, on or
about October 10, 1982.


                         FINDINGS OF FACT
                                    
     1.  The initial bargaining units for state employees were
established by the Executive Director of the Board in a unit
determination report dated September 22, 1976.  Seven bargaining
units were created at that time.  The bargaining unit that the
former Fire Inspectors were initially place in was called the Law
Enforcement, Public Safety and Regulatory Services (Non Police)
Unit.
  
     2. Subsequent to the September 22, 1976, unit determination
report, the parties negotiated certain changes in the composition
of the Law Enforcement, Public Safety and Regulatory Services
 
                               -5-
_________________________________________________________________

(Non Police) Unit.  These changes resulted in a number of
classifications being removed from that unit and placed in the
Professional and Technical Services Unit or in the Administrative
Services Unit.  The purpose of this change was to keep the
primary focus of the Law Enforcement Unit on law enforcement
functions and remove the regulatory functions to other units. 
An important criteria for retention in the unit was whether the
classification in question had the power of arrest.  The name of
the unit was changed at this time to the Law Enforcement Services
Bargaining Unit.

     3.  The classifications moved out of the Law Enforcement
Services Unit prior to the initial collective bargaining
agreement include the following:  Dairy Inspector, Field
Examiner, Field Investigator, Food Inspector, Jail Inspector,
Labor and Safety Inspector, Liquor License Inspector, Oil Burner
Inspector, Plumbing Inspector, Produce Inspector, Public
Utilities Investigator, Safety Compliance Officer, Seed Potato
Inspector, Tax Examiner, and Weights & Measures Inspector.

     4.  The position of Fire Inspector has changed over the
years.  At the time of the initial unit determination in 1976
and at the time of the negotiation of the initial collective
bargaining agreement, the position of Fire Inspector had both
fire inspection and fire investigation responsibilities. 
In October of 1982, the job was split into two positions:  Fire
Investigator and Fire Inspector.  Both of the positions remained
in the Law Enforcement Services bargaining unit.  In the ensuing
years, a series of successor collective bargaining agreements
were negotiated and continued to cover both Fire Inspectors and
Fire Investigators in the Law Enforcement Unit.  On a number of
occasions at least as early as 1992, the Fire Marshal and the
Personnel Manager for the Department of Public Safety discussed
their view that the Fire Inspector position no longer belonged in
the Law Enforcement Unit.  The Personnel Manager said that "it
wasn't worth going through the [unit clarification] process."  

                               -6-
_________________________________________________________________

The substance of such discussions was not communicated to the
Union at the time.

     5. The job descriptions for the Fire Inspector suggest the
transformation of the classification's job functions over the
years:

     A.  In 1972, the Fire Inspector job description lists
     as examples of work performed the following:

          Inspects/investigates fire and life safety
          hazards in public and private buildings . . .
          by visually observing electrical, mechanical
          and fire protection systems, structural
          features . . . and adequacy of fire exits and
          by the use of technical equipment . . . in
          order to identify and report all fire and
          life safety hazards, and to determine
          compliance with appropriate codes and
          statutes.

          Investigates fires and explosions in order to
          determine if cause is accidental, fraudulent,
          or from other criminal action.  This is done
          by determining point of origin, type and form
          of material ignited, source of heat of
          ignition and act of error or omission.

          Inspects/investigates the transportation,
          handling, storage and dispensing of explosive
          and flammable liquids and gases in order to
          determine compliance with appropriate codes
          and statutes.

          Inspects/investigates circuses, carnivals,
          race tracks and other amusement activities
          for flame retardant tents, appropriate safety
          devices on mechanical rides, structural
          safety of stands and retaining walls and
          adequate fire protection devices in order to
          ensure public safety and compliance with
          appropriate codes and statutes.

          Performs related work as required.

     B.  The primary tasks listed in the Fire Inspector job
     description remained essentially the same until 1982. 
     At that time the position of Fire Investigator was 

                               -7-
_________________________________________________________________

     created and the tasks listed for the Fire Inspector
     were the following:

          Receives and reviews request of inspection of
          properties received from Bureaus of Resource
          and Development, Hospital Licensing, the
          Office of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention,
          and the Department of Corrections, and as
          assigned by the Fire Marshal's Office.

          Inspects, reinspects, analyzes and files
          written reports on a timely basis for
          education facilities, business occupancies,
          mercantile occupancies, storage occupancies,
          places for transporting flammable liquids or
          explosives, circuses, carnivals, traveling
          amusement shows, motor vehicle race tracks,
          fireworks displays and mechanical rides, as
          directed by the Fire Marshal, using National
          Fire Protection Association's Fire Codes and
          State Statutes, in order to identify
          violations for correction to assure
          compliance as required by State Statutes.

          Reviews and submits written inspection to
          Fire Marshal's Office, using proper
          inspection forms within five working days of
          inspections, to insure owners of properties
          will receive written deficiencies in a
          reasonable time frame.

          Receives, reviews, performs and revisits
          inspections as requested, using original
          inspection forms and public relation skills,
          in order to insure deficiencies are being
          corrected in a timely manner.

          Coordinates inspections between Fire
          Marshal's Office and local fire departments.

          Instructs and trains inspectors of local fire
          departments, using statutes and adopted
          codes, in order to insure uniformity of
          inspections throughout the State.

          Receives preliminary training and assists in
          the investigation of fires and explosions as
          assigned by his/her immediate supervisor,
          using knowledge of chemistry/physics of
          fires, hand tools, electronic equipment, in
          order to assist in the resolution of possible
          criminal action.

                               -8-
_________________________________________________________________

          Makes primary determination on the
          cause/origin of fires, excluding criminal
          investigation, using knowledge of fire
          behavior and instruments to identify where
          and how fire started.

          Writes and submits basic cause determination
          reports, using notes of cause/origin
          inspection in order to prepare permanent
          record of incident.
 
     C.  The current job description for the Public Safety
     Inspector I includes both fire inspection and liquor
     licensing functions.  The fire inspection activities
     are essentially the same as before.  The inspector also
     assists in the investigation of criminal actions and
     determines the origins of fires in other than criminal
     investigations.
 
     6.  Although there are similarities in the jobs, the
distinguishing feature of the Fire Investigator classification is
the responsibilities regarding investigation of criminal
behavior.
  
     A.  The Fire Investigator job description listed the
     following as representative tasks when the position was
     created in 1982:

          Inspects/investigates fire and life safety
          hazards in public and private buildings . . .
          by visually observing electrical, mechanical
          and fire protection systems, structural
          features . . . and adequacy of fire exits and
          by the use of technical equipment . . . in
          order to identify and report all fire and
          life safety hazards, and to determine
          compliance with appropriate codes and
          statutes.

          Investigates fires and explosions in order to
          determine if cause is accidental, fraudulent,
          or from other criminal action.  This is done
          by determining point of origin, type and form
          of material ignited, source of heat of
          ignition and act of error or omission.

                               -9-
_________________________________________________________________

          Inspects/investigates the transportation,
          handling, storage and dispensing of explosive
          and flammable liquids and gases in order to
          determine compliance with appropriate codes
          and statutes.

          Inspects/investigates circuses, carnivals,
          race tracks and other amusement activities
          for flame retardant tents, appropriate safety
          devices on mechanical rides, structural
          safety of stands and retaining walls and
          adequate fire protection devices in order to
          ensure public safety and compliance with
          appropriate codes and statutes.

          Performs related work as required.

     B.  In 1983 the investigatory functions of the Fire
     Investigators were elaborated upon with the following
     addition to the job description:

          Investigates fires and explosions to
          determine person(s) responsible for the
          criminal act through approved interview and
          interrogation techniques in order to bring
          the case to prosecution through the District
          Attorney or Attorney General and acts as an
          expert witness in the case.

     C.  By 1992 the job description for the Fire Investigator
     included the following as representative tasks:

          Investigates fires and explosions in order to
          determine if cause is accidental, fraudulent,
          or from other criminal action.

          Inspects and investigates fire and life
          safety hazards in public and private
          buildings in order to identify and report all
          fire and life safety hazards and determine
          compliance with appropriate codes and
          statutes.

          Inspects and investigates the transportation,
          handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous
          materials, explosives, and flammables in
          order to determine compliance with
          appropriate codes and statutes.

          Inspects and investigates circuses, 

                              -10-
_________________________________________________________________

          carnivals, race tracks, and other amusement
          activities in order to ensure public safety
          and compliance with appropriate codes and
          statutes.

          Interviews and interrogates complaints,
          suspects, and witnesses in order to develop
          information and evidence.

          Writes and submits investigative reports,
          photographs, and other evidence in order to
          document cases.

          Testifies as an expert witness in order to
          provide evidence and assist in the
          prosecution of cases.

     7.  In January of 1996, a plan was presented to the
Productivity Realization Task Force to consolidate the functions
of fire inspection with liquor licensing and place those
functions into a single operation.  Under this proposal, two job
classifications, Fire Inspector and Liquor Licensing Examiner,
would be merged into one classification called Public Safety
Inspector I.  On about February 1, 1996, the FJA implementing
this change was approved.  On about June 17, 1996, the FJA moving
the incumbents into the newly created Public Safety Inspector I
position was approved.  The Union was notified of this change
sometime around July of 1996.  The Employer assigned the new
classification to the Administrative Services bargaining unit.

     8.  The former Fire Inspectors were not notified of the
change in their bargaining unit status until around January,
1997.

     9.  According to the testimony and the job specification,
the primary function of a Public Safety Inspector I is to inspect
and report on various businesses and public facilities in order
to identify violations and to ensure compliance with National
Fire Codes and state laws and to inspect facilities to ensure
compliance with liquor licensing laws and regulations.  With
respect to fire inspection duties, the Public Safety Inspector is
authorized to inspect facilities, file written reports, require a

                              -11-
_________________________________________________________________

written plan of correction from the property owner, issue
summonses, confiscate fireworks and recommend close orders when
the property owner has repeatedly failed to correct deficiencies. 
Former Fire Inspectors are experts on the subject of fire codes
and nationally recognized standards.  As such, they may assist
Fire Investigators in the investigation of fires to determine
whether a code violation was a contributing cause of the fire.

    10.  The Public Safety Inspector's duties related to fire
inspection are essentially the same as they were when they were
performed by the Fire Inspectors prior to the consolidation of
functions.  The only difference in duties is that the Public
Safety Inspector I is not responsible for LP gas inspection and
does not perform all inspections of explosive magazines and
transport vehicles.

    11.  Most former Fire Inspectors have prior training and
experience as firefighters and some have experience in the
construction industry.  A typical career path as perceived by
Fire Inspectors would be from firefighter to Fire Inspector to
Fire Investigator.  The most recent opening as a Fire
Investigator was not filled by a Fire Inspector but by a person
from a municipal fire department.

    12.  The opportunity for a former Fire Inspector to promote
into a Fire Investigator position is not controlled by assignment
to any particular collective bargaining unit.  Promotional rights
are based on agency or departmental assignment.

    13.  The Public Safety Inspector I is within the Licensing
and Inspections unit in the Administrative Services group at the
Department of Public Safety.  Prior to the consolidation of
functions, the Fire Inspectors were part of the Fire Marshal's
Office at the Department of Public Safety and used to attend
regular meetings of the office.  As part of the consolidation,
the former Fire Inspectors were physically relocated from the
Fire Marshal's Office in Augusta to offices in Gardiner.  The 

                              -12-
_________________________________________________________________

statute governing the Fire Marshal's Office still provides
statutory authority for fire inspection activities but the Fire
Marshal is no longer in the direct line of supervision for the
fire inspection function.  The Fire Prevention Specialist and
Fire Prevention Specialist Assistant positions, both in the
Professional and Technical Services bargaining unit, were also
moved from the Fire Marshal's Office to the Licensing and
Inspection Unit at the same time.
  
    14.  The Department of Public Safety is responsible for
various law enforcement functions, including the State Police, as
well as a number of other areas that are not law enforcement
functions, such as Emergency Medical Services and the Bureau of
Highway Safety.

    15.  The Department of Public Safety plans to have all of the
former Fire Inspectors trained in the liquor licensing
responsibilities and to have the former Liquor Licensing
Examiners trained in the fire inspection duties.  These plans
have not been implemented, as none of the former Fire Inspectors
have been cross-trained yet.

    16.  The former Fire Inspectors do not attend the Criminal
Justice Academy, they do not carry firearms and they do not have
the power of arrest.  The former Fire Inspectors took an oath of
office upon employment with the Fire Marshal's office.

    17.  The former Fire Inspectors work a standard workweek and
are not required to be on 24-hour call or on standby on weekends. 
There have been occasions when the former Fire Inspectors have
worked night details, in order to inspect nightclubs and other
establishments operating primarily at night, and on holidays for
fireworks confiscation.

    18.  The former Fire Inspectors are not required to undergo a
physical fitness or a physical agility test prior to employment. 
There are no ongoing physical fitness requirements for the former

                              -13-
_________________________________________________________________

Fire Inspectors.  The record is unclear whether a background
check would be conducted on a Public Safety Inspector I applicant
under current procedure.

    19.  The Fire Investigators and most of the other classifi-
cations in the Law Enforcement Services bargaining unit attend
the Criminal Justice Academy, carry firearms and have the power
of arrest.

    20.  The Fire Investigators and most of the other classifi-
cations in the Law Enforcement Unit work a non-standard work-
week, are required to be on 24-hour call and on standby on
weekends.  The current collective bargaining agreement for the
Law Enforcement Unit contains five separate side agreements
covering specific issues regarding work hours for different non-
standard employees.
 
    21.  Many of the classifications in the Law Enforcement Unit
are required to undergo a background check or a physical agility
test (or both) prior to employment.  The current Law Enforcement
Services collective bargaining agreement creates a labor
management committee for a Physical Fitness Assessment Program.
  
    22.  The former Fire Inspectors were all issued uniforms when
they were hired into that classification.  The Fire Inspectors
were required to wear the uniforms in most situations.  As Public
Safety Inspectors, the former Fire Inspectors continue to receive
a clothing allowance to cover the costs of cleaning their
uniforms.

    23.  The former Fire Inspectors were assigned a state vehicle
that, prior to January of 1997, they were permitted to use for
personal business when not on duty.  In January 1997, the former
Fire Inspectors were informed that they could no longer use their
assigned state vehicle for personal business after hours or on
the weekend.

    24.  A common theme throughout all of the job specifications 

                              -14-
_________________________________________________________________

for classifications in the Law Enforcement Services Bargaining
Unit is the responsibility for conducting criminal investiga-
tions, gathering evidence and presenting that evidence in a
written report or testifying in court.  These law enforcement
officers must be knowledgeable about procedural due process
requirements and issues concerning admissibility of evidence. 
The complaints and investigations articles of the Law Enforcement
Services collective bargaining agreements have always had unique
features reflecting this heightened awareness.

    25.  The former Fire Inspectors must travel to various
locations to perform their inspections and are sometimes required
to inspect premises where the owners or residents are hostile to
government officials.  There is some danger of exposure to
infectious diseases when inspecting health care facilities.

    26.  There are a number of classifications in the
Administrative Services Unit whose primary function is inspection
such as Plumbing Inspector, Oil Burner Inspector, Jail Inspector,
Dairy Inspector, Weights & Measures Inspectors, Produce
Inspectors, Seed Potato Inspectors and Field Inspectors.  Each of
these classifications requires knowledge of state and federal
laws and regulations and applicable National Codes or Standards. 
For example, Jail Inspectors must be knowledgeable about the
American Correction Association Standards and federal and state
laws and regulations of jail standards and Plumbing Inspectors
must have a master plumber's license.  In addition to the
inspection function, the job specification for the Oil Burner
Inspector includes assisting the Fire Marshal's Office in fire
and arson investigations to identify oil and fuel system
malfunctions.  Generally, these classifications are responsible
for enforcing a particular area of law by determining whether a
party is in compliance with the applicable code or regulation. 
Individuals in these classifications do not have the power of
arrest but they do have authority to certify or withhold
certification or require corrective action.  These jobs involve 

                              -15-
_________________________________________________________________

working with the public in a variety of situations to inform them
of the relevant standards and to ensure that corrective steps are
taken.


                                DISCUSSION

Preliminary Matters

     The petition in this case was filed pursuant to section
979-E(3) of the Act.  That provision of the Act states:

     Unit clarification.  Where there is a certified or
     currently recognized bargaining representative and
     where the circumstances surrounding the formation of an
     existing bargaining unit are alleged to have changed
     sufficiently to warrant modification in the composition
     of that bargaining unit, any public employer or any
     recognized or certified bargaining agent may file a
     petition for unit clarification, provided that the
     parties are unable to agree on appropriate
     modifications and there is no question concerning
     representation.

The parties have stipulated facts indicating that at least three
of the four requirements for filing a unit clarification petition
have been met--the petition was filed by the certified bargaining
agent, the parties are unable to agree upon the modifications,
and there is no question concerning representation.
  
     The fourth requirement for filing a unit clarification
petition is that there have been alleged changed circumstances
surrounding the formation of the bargaining unit.  In 1982, the
Fire Inspector classification that was originally placed in the
Law Enforcement Unit in 1976 was split into two different classi-
fications (Fire Inspector and Fire Investigator).  After the
split, both classifications remained in that unit.  In 1996, a
new classification called Public Safety Inspector I was created
which consolidated the functions of the former Fire Inspectors
and Liquor Licensing Examiners.  This new classification was
placed in the Administrative Services bargaining unit by the
employer.

                              -16-
_________________________________________________________________

     The creation of a new job classification normally meets the
requirement for changed circumstances as it is impossible to
consider the bargaining unit status of a position before it
exists.  Maine State Employees Association and State of Maine,
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, No. 83-UC-43 and
91-UC-11, slip op. at 8 (Me.L.R.B. May 4, 1993), citing Portland
Public Library Staff Assoc. and Portland Public Library, 
No. 88-UC-03, slip op. at 9 (Me.L.R.B. June 2, 1988).  Merely
renaming a position, however, is not considered a sufficient
change to justify modification to a unit even if there are minor
changes in the duties and responsibilities of the position. 
Portland Public Library, supra, slip op. at 9 (renaming the
Office Assistant in Administration Office to Secretary to the
Assistant Director not sufficient change when only difference is
to whom the clerical support is provided).
  
     In this case, the position of Public Safety Inspector I was
created on February 1, 1996, and the former Fire Inspectors and
former Liquor Licensing Examiners were reclassified into Public
Safety Inspectors on about July 1, 1996.  The job description for
the Public Safety Inspector I includes most of the responsibil-
ities previously held by Fire Inspectors and Liquor Licensing
Examiners.  The record indicates that following this reclassifi-
cation, the duties of the former Fire Inspectors changed somewhat
in that they no longer inspect all explosive magazines and LP gas
storage facilities.  The former Fire Inspectors have not been
cross-trained in the liquor licensing function and it does not
appear that the former Liquor Licensing Examiners have been
cross-trained either.

     If the change in job duties following the reclassification
were the only basis for seeking a modification to the bargaining
unit, I would be hard pressed to find that change sufficient. 
In both unit determination and unit clarification contexts,
arguments based upon the intention to treat or utilize employees
in certain ways in the future have repeatedly been rejected.

                              -17-
_________________________________________________________________

M.S.A.D. No. 14 and East Grand Teachers Ass'n., MLRB No. 83-A-09,
slip op. at 9, 6 NPER 20-14036 (Aug. 24, 1983); Dept. of Public
Safety and Maine State Employees Association, No. 83-UC-45 and
91-UC-45, slip op. at 17 (Me.L.R.B. Feb. 4, 1994).  Just as the
Board considers future duties and responsibilities to be too
speculative to serve as the basis for exclusion from a unit, it
would be improper to rely on unimplemented plans to cross-train
and consolidate functions sometime in the future in making a unit
clarification decision.  In this case, however, it is not
necessary to analyze the scope of the changes in the job duties
arising from the reclassification because the record shows that
the changes to the Fire Inspector classification made in 1982 are
sufficient to constitute a substantial change for unit clarifica-
tion purposes.  Either party could have petitioned for unit
clarification subsequent to the creation of the Fire Investigator
position and the alteration of the Fire Inspector position in
1982.  The trigger for the current petition by the Union was the
placement of the new classification in the Administrative
Services Unit following the 1996 reclassification.  The threshold
requirement of sufficient change that serves as the basis for
this petition is the 1982 change in duties, not the 1996
reclassification.

     The Union argues that the 1996 reclassification of the Fire
Inspector position into the Public Safety Inspector position was
bogus because the duties performed by the former Fire Inspectors
are essentially the same as the duties they performed before the
reclassification.  The Union argues that the resulting reassignment
to the Administrative Services Unit is therefore improper.  As the
State so strenuously pointed out, this argument is being made
before the wrong forum.  There is an established procedure for
contesting the appropriateness of a reclassification and that
procedure does not involve the Maine Labor Relations Board.  As far
as the Maine Labor Relations Board is concerned, when the employer
creates a new classification, the employer is entitled to place 

                              -18-
_________________________________________________________________

that new position in a bargaining unit.[fn]1  In this case, that
is just what the employer did.  This proceeding is to determine
whether the placement was appropriate, not whether the reclassifi-
cation was appropriate.

     The Union also argues that the changes made in 1982 to the
former Fire Inspectors job should not be considered because the
State has signed a number of collective bargaining agreements
covering the Law Enforcement Services Bargaining Unit that
continued to include the Fire Inspector classification.  These
agreements were signed even though the department's personnel
manager recognized that a unit clarification petition was justi-
fied.  In essence, the Union's argument is that in acquiescing to
the continued inclusion of the classification in the unit, the
State is precluded from using the 1982 changes to support the
placement of the classification in the Administrative Services
Unit.  This argument, if accepted, would turn the established
policy favoring the alteration of bargaining units through
negotiations on its head.

     SELRA includes a statutory preference that unit placement
issues be resolved by agreement of the parties, a preference that
is also reflected in Board Rule 1.16 regarding unit clarification
matters.  Rule 1.16(A)(2) permits the dismissal of a unit
clarification petition if it requests changes "which could have
been but were not raised prior to the conclusion of negotiations
which resulted in an agreement containing a bargaining unit
description."[fn]2  This rule fosters improvement in the
relationship between the parties by promoting predictability and
stability during the term of the collective bargaining agreement. 
See, e.g., Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and Maine State 
____________________

     1 Unless, of course, the employer's reclassification of a
position and unit assignment constitutes a prohibited practice.

     2 The application of this aspect of Rule 1.16 is not in
question here because there was no agreement in effect at the
time the petition was filed.

                              -19-
_________________________________________________________________

Employees Association, Nos. 83-UC-43 and 91-UC-11, slip op. at
9-10, (Me.L.R.B. May 4, 1993).
   
     The Union's argument that the employer should not be
permitted to refer to the 1982 changes must fail because it would
transform the policy favoring resolution of unit placement issues
by agreement of the parties into a policy requiring negotiation
of those issues.  As a practical matter, a party would have to
bring to the table any change that could potentially be the basis
for a unit clarification, lest the Board later find that the
change occurred prior to signing the agreement.  In many cases
where a unit clarification is based on a change in job duties,
those changes have not been the result of a job reclassification
but have been changes that evolved over time.  For example, a
clerical employee who has been excluded as a confidential
employee may, over time, see less and less confidential work as
technology developments enable the "confidential" manager to
produce the needed documents alone.  See, e.g., Lincoln Sanitary
District and Teamsters Union Local 340, Case No. 92-UC-02,
(Me.L.R.B. Nov. 17, 1997) (holding secretary/bookkeeper not a
confidential employee where manager had sole access to confiden-
tial documents in files and on word processor).  Similarly, an
employee may gradually assume various supervisory responsibil-
ities so that eventually it may be appropriate to move that
person into a supervisory unit.  See, e.g., Agreement on
Appropriate Bargaining Unit (MLRB Form 1) by State and MSEA dated
July 1, 1993, moving Auto Mechanic Supervisor from Operations,
Maintenance and Support Services Unit to the Supervisory Services
Unit; MLRB Form 1 by State and MSEA dated Feb. 28, 1997, moving
Forester II (Bureau of Public Lands) and Nurse IV (Maine State
Prison) from the Professional-Technical Services Unit to the
Supervisory Services Unit.  It may not be entirely clear when
these changes are underway whether an impartial fact finder would
conclude that a modification is appropriate.  Accepting the
Union's argument would force a party to raise a unit clarifica-
tion issue at the bargaining table at the first hint of change.  

                              -20-
_________________________________________________________________

To do otherwise would risk a later determination that there was
sufficient change at that time and the subsequent collective
bargaining agreement precluded any future attempt to clarify the
unit.
 
     There is nothing in the Act or Board precedent to suggest
that units are carved in stone to the extent the Union calls for
in this case.  The availability of the unit clarification
procedure in section 979-E(3) of the Act indicates just the
opposite.  In addition, the Board addressed this point directly
in affirming a hearing examiner's decision that a new unit of
Department of Corrections employees should not be severed from an
existing unit.  The Board stated:

          This decision does not mean, nor should it be read
     to imply, that the composition or the number of State
     employee bargaining units established in 1976 can never
     be altered. . . .  With the passage of time, changes
     may transpire which will affect one or more of the
     component community of interest factors for the
     classifications in a given bargaining unit and,
     therefore, the relationship or affinity among said
     classifications will also change.

Teamsters Local Union No. 48 and State of Maine (Institutional
Services Unit) and Council No. 74, AFSCME and Maine State
Employees Association, No. 84-A-02, slip op. at 4-5 (Me.L.R.B.
April 2, 1984).

     In summary, the threshold requirement of changes in circum-
stances since the formation of the unit has been met and there is
no basis for ignoring changes that occurred many years ago.

Community of Interest

     In determining appropriate bargaining units, the Board's
primary goal is to ensure that the employees in each unit have a
substantial mutual interest in wages and other terms and condi-
tions of employment.  Lewiston Firefighters Association, 354 A.2d
154, 161 (Me. 1976).  This "community of interest" provides for
compatible goals among unit members which, in turn, strengthens

                              -21-

_________________________________________________________________

the bargaining position of the employees as a group.  Id.  The
focus on community of interest is necessary in unit clarification
proceedings as well as initial unit determinations. 26 M.R.S.A.
 979-E(2).

     There are eleven factors that must be considered, at a
minimum, in determining whether employee classifications at issue
share the requisite community of interest:  (1) similarity in the
kind of work performed; (2) common supervision and determination
of labor relations policy; (3) similarity in the scale and manner
of determining earnings; (4) similarity in employment benefits,
hours of work and other terms and conditions of employment;
(5) similarity in the qualifications, skills and training of
employees; (6) frequency of contact or interchange among the
employees; (7) geographic proximity; (8) history of collective
bargaining; (9) desires of the affected employees; (10) extent
of union organization; and (11) the employer's organizational
structure.  Board Rule 1.11(F).
  
     In the Unit Determination Report dated September 22, 1976,
the Executive Director of the Board described the community of
interest in the Law Enforcement, Public Safety and Regulatory
Services (Non Police) unit created on that date:

          This unit includes job classifications involved
     with law enforcement and other public safety and
     regulatory functions, excluding State Police personnel. 
     Many of these employees are subject to call backs and
     frequently work a nonstandard work week.  Their work
     may require the wearing of a uniform and their job
     duties may involve an element of personal danger.  Many
     of these employees enjoy a retirement plan which is
     different from that which is accorded to "regular"
     state employees who work standard work weeks under
     conditions where there is no common element of personal
     danger associated with job performance.  Moreover,
     these employees perform their services away from a set
     office environment and are frequently called upon to
     travel to general or specified locations in order to
     perform their services.

          Employees in this unit receive varying degrees of
     special training in various aspects of law enforcement. 
     

                              -22-
_________________________________________________________________

     Some of these employees are required to be in good
     physical condition although this is not necessarily a
     condition of employment and they must be free of
     psychological problems or blemishes on their personal
     records.  These employees are frequently supervised by
     immediate supervisors who have been promoted through
     the ranks.

          These employees may not perceive themselves as
     either white or blue collar workers but as specialized
     professionals whose work experience and qualifications
     are unique to the services they are required to
     perform.  They have special interests in hours of work,
     uniform allowances, holiday pay, vacation scheduling,
     safety equipment and procedures, meal allowances,
     standby pay, pay for court appearances, scheduling and
     days off, mileage allowance, special health insurance,
     special retirement benefits and physical examinations. 

     Although the parties subsequently agreed upon changes to
this unit to focus it on law enforcement functions, most of the
executive director's observations on the community of interest
remain true today.

     In the same unit determination report, the Executive
Director of the Board presented the following explanation of the
community of interest among those employees in the Administrative
Services bargaining unit:

          Employees in this unit generally perform their
     duties in an office environment and their work product
     may generally be described as a service, opposed to the
     production of product(s).  Employees in this unit are
     commonly referred to as "white collar" workers who work
     with and near light office equipment during a standard-
     ized work week.  Their career ladders, promotions and
     transfers are almost exclusively within this unit and
     they have unique interests regarding their working
     conditions, i.e., parking facilities, heat and air
     conditioning, ventilation, rest periods and facilities
     therefor, rest rooms, dress codes, inclement weather
     policy, policies concerning advancement, training and
     promotion, equipment replacement, cafeteria service or
     its proximity, and vacation schedule.  There is also
     concern for the basic considerations of pay, retire-
     ment, and personnel rules.

          These employees generally work inside and with
     other employees or members of the public who share 

                              -23-
_________________________________________________________________

     interrelated work areas, functions and/or concerns. 
     Employees in this unit are seldom, if ever, subject to
     emergency call back or standby requirements or shift
     work.  These employees are seldom, if ever, required to
     supply any of the tools of their profession as these
     items are generally part of the office environment
     provided by the employer.  Most of these employees have
     private training and/or experience which qualify them
     for their jobs and give them relatively high potential
     for transfers and promotions to other generic groupings
     or job titles within the bargaining unit.

     This unit includes a wider variety of classifications than
the Law Enforcement Unit.  Most of the observations here continue
to apply to inspection positions as well as more traditional
office classifications.

     Turning to the community of interest factors in the present
case, the record establishes that the primary function of the
former Fire Inspectors is to inspect various facilities for
compliance with National Fire Codes and state law.  They bring to
their jobs a substantial amount of experience as former fire-
fighters or in the construction trades.  They are experts on the
subject of the state fire codes and nationally recognized
standards.  They must be able to identify problems, determine the
severity of the problem and the best course for its resolution,
and work with the property owner to ensure that corrective action
is taken.  In addition, the former Fire Inspectors' expertise in
fire codes and construction standards enable them to assist Fire
Investigators in determining whether code violations contributed
to a particular fire.
  
     With respect to the first of the eleven factors, the
similarity in the work performed, the former Fire Inspectors'
work is similar to the inspection function performed by a variety
of other inspection positions in the Administrative Services
Unit.  For example, Jail Inspectors, Plumbing Inspectors, Dairy
Inspectors, Oil Burner Inspectors and Weights & Measures
Inspectors are classifications that all demand expertise in a
particular technical area and all involve a similar inspection 

                              -24-
_________________________________________________________________

function.  These employees, along with other inspection positions
in the Administrative Services Unit such as Produce Inspectors,
Seed Potato Inspectors and Field Inspectors, must perform their
inspections in a variety of locations in the field and may face a
hostile reception from the property owner.  They all "enforce"
the law to the extent that they must determine whether the party
is in compliance with the applicable code or regulation.  In
addition, they all have the authority to "enforce" the law to the
extent that the inspector can withhold certification or require
corrective action to ensure conformance with the law.
 
     The Union argues that the work performed by the former Fire
Inspectors is very similar to the classifications in the Law
Enforcement Unit and that the positions should be moved back to
that unit.  The Union contends that the former Fire Inspectors
perform many of the same tasks as Fire Investigators and use the
same sort of background knowledge of fire behavior and building
construction to identify safety issues.  The fact that the former
Fire Inspectors do not have the power of arrest and do not carry
guns is not important, the Union argues, because not all positions
in the Law Enforcement unit have the power of arrest or the
authority to carry guns.
  
     The evidence presented indicates that the work performed by
the former Fire Inspectors is more like the various inspectors in
the Administrative Services Unit than it is like the positions in
the Law Enforcement Unit.  The vast majority of the Law Enforcement
Services jobs, including Fire Investigators, have the power of
arrest.  In addition, most of them, including Fire Investigators,
are authorized to carry firearms.  The former Fire Inspectors do
not have the power of arrest and do not carry guns.  The ability to
issue summonses is inconsequential as many other officials who are
not law enforcement officers may do so as well.  (See, e.g., 30-A
M.R.S.A.  4552 authorizing municipal code enforcement officers,
plumbing inspectors and building inspectors to issue a summons to
any person who violates a law that the inspector enforces.)

                                -25-
_________________________________________________________________


     Furthermore, the job specifications show that one aspect of
many of the jobs in the Law Enforcement Unit is the responsibility
for investigating violations of law, gathering evidence, presenting
that evidence in a written report or testifying in court.  The
former Fire Inspectors are responsible for performing inspections
but they do not have any direct responsibility for investigations
like Fire Investigators and the other classifications in the Law
Enforcement Unit.  This distinction goes to the heart of the change
in the units agreed upon by the parties following the 1976 unit
determination.  At that time, the parties agreed that the Law
Enforcement Unit should be limited to law enforcement functions and
that classifications responsible for regulatory inspections should
be moved to other units.  Here, the former Fire Inspectors have a
minor role in assisting in some investigations, but their primary
role is clearly a regulatory function.  The assistance they provide
to Fire Investigators on the scene of a fire is comparable to the
expert assistance provided to the Fire Marshal's Office by Oil
Burner Inspectors.  Overall, the work performed by the former Fire
Inspectors is much more similar to classifications in the
Administrative Services Unit performing regulatory inspections than
it is to the work performed by Law Enforcement Unit members.

     The second and third community-of-interest factors, common
supervision and determination of labor relations policy and
similarity in scale and manner of determining earnings, are not
particularly significant in this case.  The Department of Public
Safety includes some classifications that are in the
Administrative Services Unit and others that are in the Law
Enforcement Unit.  The range of earnings for the former Fire
Inspectors is not significantly out of line with either of the
two units.  The manner of determining earnings is the same for
both units, i.e., employees progress from step to step in the
salary grade on the basis of satisfactory job performance.

     The fourth factor to consider in making a community-of-
interest determination is the degree of similarity in employment 

                              -26-
_________________________________________________________________

benefits, hours of work and other terms and conditions of
employment.  This factor supports a finding that the former Fire
Inspectors share a community of interest with the Administrative
Services bargaining unit.  The former Fire Inspectors, like most
positions in the Administrative Services unit, work a standard
workweek and are not required to be on 24-hour call or to be on
standby on weekends.  There have been occasions where the former
Fire Inspectors worked night details in order to be able to
inspect nightclubs and other such establishments, but generally
this has not been the case.  There is no physical agility test
required prior to employment as a Fire Inspector nor is there any
physical fitness standard applied as a condition of continued
employment.  Like other inspectors in the Administrative Services
unit, the former Fire Inspectors are required to travel to
different locations to perform their duties.  In all of these
respects, the former Fire Inspectors share a community of
interest with many classifications in the Administrative Services
unit, and share a strong community of interest with other
inspection positions in that unit.

     Very few of the issues related to benefits, hours of work or
other terms and conditions of employment noted in the executive
director's decision dated September 22, 1976, establishing the
initial Law Enforcement Unit are applicable to former Fire
Inspectors.  Unlike the former Fire Inspectors, many of the
classifications in the Law Enforcement Unit are required to work
a non-standard workweek and have issues regarding work hours that
are different than members of the Administrative Services Unit. 
Similarly, there are physical fitness requirements that are not
relevant to Administrative Services Unit members that are very
important considerations for members of the Law Enforcement Unit,
as evidenced by the labor management committee created in their
contract to address that issue.  In addition, many of the members
of the Law Enforcement Unit face an element of personal danger in
performing their jobs that is well beyond the danger associated
with hostility directed at government inspectors or the danger of

                              -27-
_________________________________________________________________

exposure to infectious diseases at hospitals.
  
     The Union argued that the fact that the former Fire
Inspectors are issued uniforms and wear the uniforms in most
situations indicates a community of interest with the Law
Enforcement Unit.  Given that not all classifications in the Law
Enforcement Unit are required to wear uniforms and that wearing
uniforms is not unheard of in the Administrative Services Unit, I
do not attach much weight to this matter.  Wearing uniforms may
affect how an individual is perceived, but it does not affect the
nature of the job performed.  Similarly, taking an oath of office
does not alter the nature of the job performed.

     The fifth factor in the community of interest analysis
concerns the similarity in the qualifications, skills and
training of employees.  As previously noted, the former Fire
Inspectors have a significant amount of expertise in fire safety
issues, fire behavior and construction methods that they bring to
their job.  This knowledge is often gained through service as a
firefighter or in the construction trades or through a combina-
tion of technical training and experience.  The experience and
background of the former Fire Inspectors is similar to the type
of expertise and background that other inspectors in the
Administrative Services Unit are required to have.  For example,
Plumbing Inspectors must have a Master Plumber's license and Jail
Inspectors must be knowledgeable about the American Correction
Association Standards and federal and state laws and regulations
of jail standards.
  
     The qualification and training of Fire Inspectors is
substantially different than that required of classifications in
the Law Enforcement Services Unit.  Most of the members of the
latter unit have attended the Criminal Justice Academy, a
training that provides a critical foundation for law enforcement
responsibilities.  The fire inspectors have received an extensive
amount of training but do not attend the Criminal Justice
Academy.

                              -28-
_________________________________________________________________

     The sixth and seventh community of interest factors,
frequency of contact or interchange among the employees and
geographic proximity, is not particularly telling either way. 
The former Fire Inspectors used to have their offices located in
the Fire Marshal's Office along with the Fire Investigators.  The
Fire Marshal's Office is now in Augusta and the former Fire
Inspectors are now located in Gardiner.  There may be even less
contact now between the former Fire Inspectors and Fire
Investigators or other members of the Law Enforcement unit than
there was before.

     The eighth and tenth factors (history of collective
bargaining and extent of union organization) do not compel a
decision either way in this unit clarification proceeding.  With
respect to the ninth factor, the desires of the affected
employees, the former Fire Inspectors were always part of the Law
Enforcement Services Bargaining Unit and clearly would like to
return to that unit.  This desire is understandable in light of
the perceived economic benefit flowing from inclusion in the Law
Enforcement Services Unit.[fn]3  To include classifications in a
unit merely because certain employees desire it when the other
community of interest factors weigh against it would tend to
weaken rather than strengthen the bargaining position of the unit
members collectively.
____________________

     3 Individual assignment of a state vehicle seems to be an
important issue for the former Fire Inspectors.  They perceive
the entitlement to a car to be a function of bargaining unit
assignment.  Title 5 M.R.S.A.  7-A appears to govern the
assignment of vehicles to state employees.  I do not see any
reference in that statute to bargaining unit assignment.  It
refers to "law enforcement personnel with the power of arrest
regularly assigned to field duty" and other exceptions unrelated
to bargaining unit status.  The record also indicates some
concern on the part of the former Fire Inspectors regarding the
allowance provided to them for cleaning uniforms.  Again, the
entitlement to this allowance does not follow bargaining unit
assignment but seems to be a function of whether the employer
requires that the uniform be worn.  The collective bargaining
agreements for the Law Enforcement Services Bargaining Unit and
the Administrative Services Bargaining Unit both contain
provisions for a Uniform Maintenance Allowance.

                              -29-
_________________________________________________________________

     The final community of interest factor, the employer's
organizational structure, suggests that placement in the
Administrative Services Bargaining Unit is more appropriate than
in the Law Enforcement Services Unit.  The fire inspection
function is now performed as part of the Licensing and
Inspections Unit within the Department of Public Safety.  The
inspection and licensing role of this Unit distinguish it from
the law enforcement activities of many of the other bureaus in
the department.
    
     The Union argues that because the statute creating the Fire
Marshal's Office authorizes inspection functions, the inspectors
must, by necessity, report to the Fire Marshal.  If they are
effectively still part of the Fire Marshal's Office, the argument
goes, they should remain in the Law Enforcement Services
Bargaining Unit like the Fire Investigators are.  This argument
ignores the fact that there is another fire prevention function
in the new Licensing and Inspection unit that was previously in
the Fire Marshal's Office.  That function was performed by Fire
Prevention Specialists and Assistants who were never part of the
Law Enforcement Unit.  Thus, even if I were to accept the claim
that the former Fire Inspectors still report to the Fire Marshal,
it is not an automatic indicator of alignment with the Law
Enforcement Services Unit.

     The community-of-interest factors have been evaluated both
individually and together.  Having completed this analysis, I
conclude that the classification of Public Safety Inspector I,
including those employees formerly classified as Fire Inspectors,
is appropriately placed in the Administrative Services Bargaining
Unit.  Nearly all of the factors either support the continued
placement of the former Fire Inspectors in the Administrative
Services Bargaining Unit or have no significant impact either way. 
These factors establishing a clear and identifiable community of
interest far outweigh those issues that could support placement in
the Law Enforcement Services Bargaining Unit.

                              -30-
_________________________________________________________________
 
                              ORDER

     On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and
discussion, and by virtue of and pursuant to the powers granted by
26 M.R.S.A.  979-E, it is ORDERED:

     The Union's petition for unit clarification is denied. 
     The Public Safety Inspector I's who were formerly Fire
     Inspectors will remain in the Administrative Services
     Bargaining Unit.

Dated at Augusta, Maine, this 6th day of November, 1997.

                                MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD



                                /s/________________________
                                Marc P. Ayotte
                                Executive Director


The parties are hereby advised of their right, pursuant to
26 M.R.S.A.  979-G(2)(Supp. 1993), to appeal this report to the
Maine Labor Relations Board.  To initiate such an appeal, the
party seeking appellate review must file a notice of appeal with
the Board within fifteen (15) days of the date of issuance of this
report.  See Board Rules 1.12 and 7.03 for requirements.


                              -31-