Affirmed by Board, Case No. 15-UDA-01, December 18, 2014.
STATE OF MAINE
MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Case No. 14-UD-05
Issued: September 19, 2014
AFSCME COUNCIL 93
Petitioner,
and
TOWN OF READFIELD
Public Employer.
UNIT DETERMINATION REPORT
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This unit determination proceeding was initiated on
October 30, 2013, when Sylvia Hebert, a Staff Representative for
the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
("AFSCME," or "Union"), filed a Petition for Unit Determination
with the Maine Labor Relations Board ("Board" or "MLRB").
The Petition seeks to create a bargaining unit composed of the
Transfer Station Assistant Manager, Transfer Station Attendant,
Cemetery Sexton/Animal Control Officer/Administrative Assistant,
Town Clerk/Registrar, Maintenance Man, Collections Clerk, and
Finance Officer. Readfield ("the Town"), the respondent in this
case, filed its timely response to the petition on November 15,
2014. The Town opposes the Union's petition on the grounds[fn]1 that
the Town Clerk is not a "public employee" within the meaning of
26 M.R.S. § 962(6)(B); even if the Town Clerk is a "public
employee" within the meaning of § 962(6)(B), she nevertheless is
a Department Head and must be excluded pursuant to 26 M.R.S.
§ 962(6)(D); the Board Secretary position should be excluded as a
confidential position pursuant to 26 M.R.S. § 962(6)(C); two
1 The Town also originally opposed the petition on the ground that the showing
of interest was not sufficient. The MLRB determined that the showing was
sufficient for the proposed unit, and that finding was not contested.
[end of page 1]
proposed classifications are improper and based on inaccurate
descriptions; and there is not a sufficient community of interest
among the positions to warrant a finding that the proposed unit is
appropriate.
On April 4, 2014, a unit determination Notice of Hearing was
issued and posted for the benefit of affected employees. The
original hearing was postponed at the request of one of the
parties, and a Revised Notice of Hearing dated May 5, 2014,
setting the hearing date for June 18, 2014, was issued and posted
for the benefit of affected employees. A unit determination
hearing was held in front of the hearing examiner on June 18,
2014, at the Maine Labor Relations Board. The Union was
represented by Sylvia Hebert, Staff Representative for AFSCME, and
the Town was represented by Matthew Tarasevich, Esq. The parties
were afforded the full opportunity to examine and cross-examine
witnesses and to present evidence. Robin Lint, Deborah Nichols,
Theresa Shaw, Karen Petersen, and Mark Birtwell testified on
behalf of the Union. Stephan Pakulski testified on behalf of the
Town. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties were given
the chance to give a closing statement, but chose to submit
closing argument two weeks after they receive the transcript.
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction of the hearing examiner over this matter,
including the ability to make a unit determination, is pursuant to
26 M.R.S.A. § § 966(1) and 966(2).
EXHIBITS
The following exhibits were offered and admitted into the
record:
A-1: Petition for Unit Determination filed October 30, 2013
[end of page 2]
A-2: Response to Unit Determination filed November 15, 2014
A-3: Notice of Hearing dated April 4, 2014 setting the
Hearing for Friday, May 9, 2014
A-4: Revised Notice of Hearing dated May 5, 2014 setting
the hearing for Wednesday, June 18, 2014
J-1: Job Descriptions [Primary position title in bold]:
Town Clerk/Registrar/Deputy Tax Collector/Deputy
Treasurer/FOAA Officer
Board Secretary
Finance Officer/Deputy Treasurer/Deputy Clerk/Deputy Tax
Collector/Deputy Registrar
Collection Clerk/Deputy Registrar/Deputy Treasurer/Deputy
Clerk/Deputy Tax Collector
Head of Maintenance (formerly Foreman)
Transfer Station Attendant
Readfield Cemetery Sexton
Assistant Transfer Station Manager
Animal Control Officer/Constable
Lakes Region Mutual Aid Fire Departments' Administrative
Assistant
Readfield Groundskeeper (part-time, temporary, seasonal)
J-2: Calendar Year 2013 Payroll Record for Karen B. Peterson,
with notation of total hours worked in particular job
categories and percentage of total work time in each area.
J-3: FY-2015 Budget Payroll Allotments by Position to be worked
by employee Karen B. Peterson
E-1: Select Board Minutes
E-2: Pay Records
E-3: Appointment Notices
E-4: Town of Readfield Personnel Policy
STIPULATIONS OF THE PARTIES
1) The Town of Readfield is a public employer within the
meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(7).
2) AFSCME is a public employee organization which is
eligible to become a bargaining agent as defined in 26 M.R.S.A.
§ 962(2).
[end of page 3]
3) The public access officer, referred to as "FOAA Officer"
in the petition, is not a separate job classification; rather, it
is a job duty that can be assigned by the Town to an employee,
including a union employee, and the Town has the right and the
discretion in the future to assign that function to whomever it
might need, depending upon a change in town manager status or
other circumstances. No such change is anticipated at this time.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DISCUSSION
An appropriate bargaining unit consists of positions whose
incumbent employees share a clear and identifiable community of
interest. Readfield is typical of many small Maine towns: the
same individual may occupy more than one position, but some
positions are eligible for inclusion in a bargaining unit and some
are not. This situation gives rise to the question of whether an
individual who occupies both an eligible and an exempt position
may be included in any bargaining unit. The response provided by
the statute is that "anyone [any person] excepted from the
definition of public employee under section 962 may not be
included in a bargaining unit." 26 M.R.S.A. § 966(1). Thus, the
Hearing Examiner's job is to analyze each position with respect to
the statutory exemptions; if the position is exempt, the employee
must be excluded from a bargaining unit even if that employee
holds another position that is not exempt.
The issues presented in this unit determination case are:
1) Is the Town Clerk in Readfield "appointed to office,"
within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(6)(B), and may not be
included any bargaining unit for that reason?
2) Is the Town Clerk in Readfield a department head,
within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(6)(D), and may not be
included in any bargaining unit for that reason?
[end of page 4]
3) Is the Board Secretary a "confidential" employee,
within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(6)(C), and may not be
included in any bargaining unit for that reason?
4) Can the fact that the Finance Officer serves as the
acting town manager when the Town Manager is away serve as the
reason for excluding that position from any bargaining unit?
5) Do the positions proposed for inclusion in a single
bargaining unit share a clear and identifiable community of
interest, such that the resulting unit would be appropriate for
purposes of collective bargaining?
The Municipal Public Employees Labor Relations Law, (the
"Act"), 26 M.R.S.A. § 961, et seq., was enacted to improve the
relationship between public employers and their employees by
providing a uniform system through which public employees can
decide whether to be represented by a labor organization in
collective bargaining. The Act mandates that it covers all
municipal employees except for those explicitly excluded from the
statutory definition of :public employee." The Board has held
that the language of each exclusion must be carefully and narrowly
construed to avoid undermining the purpose of the Act. State of
Maine and Maine State Employees Association, No. 82-A-02, at 6
(June 2, 1983).
1. Is the Town Clerk in Readfield "appointed to office" within
the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(6)(B)?
Section 962(6)(B) of the Act exempts from the definition of
"public employee" and, hence from the coverage of the Act,
... any person ...[a]ppointed to office pursuant to statute,
ordinance or resolution for a specified term of office by
the executive head or body of the public employer.
[end of page 5]
Over the years, hearing examiners have wrestled with the
meaning of the word "appointed" that is found in § 962(6)(B) as
well as in the department-head exclusion in paragraph (D). See,
Town of Topsham and Local S/89 District Lodge #4, International
Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, No. 02-UC-01, at
16-17 (May 9, 2002). In the appeal of Topsham, the Board reversed
the hearing examiner's conclusion that appointments in a town
operating under a "Town Manager Plan" necessarily required
confirmation by the board of selectmen. The Board instead held
that in such a system, "the town manager is the executive head and
the selectmen the executive body of the town." Topsham, No.02-UCA-01,
at 5 (Aug. 29, 2002), aff'd, No. AP-02-68 (Me. Super. Ct.,
Ken. Cty., Mar. 20, 2003).
Title 30-A M.R.S.A., chapter 123, sub-chapter 2 contains the
statutory provisions under which municipalities may adopt and
operate under the Town Manager Plan. Section 2631, sub- § 2
contains a general description of town government under the Plan,
as follows:
2. Government. The government of each town under this
subchapter shall consist of a town meeting, an elected
board of selectmen, an elected school committee, an
appointed town manager and any other officials and
employees that may be appointed under this subchapter,
general law or ordinance. Other town officials may be
elected by ballot, including, but not limited to,
moderator, assessors, overseers of the poor, clerk and
treasurer. The election of officials at the last annual
town meeting shall require that those town offices
continue to be filled by election until the town
designates otherwise. (emphasis added).
Section 2636 of the Town Manager Plan Law provides that town
managers:
6. Appoint town officials. Unless otherwise provided by
town ordinance, shall appoint, supervise and control all
[end of page 6]
town officials whom the municipal officers are required by
law to appoint, except members of boards, commissions,
committees and single assessors; and appoint, supervise
and control all other officials, subordinates and
assistants, except that the town manager may delegate this
authority to a department head and report all appointments
to the board of selectmen;
Neither party sought introduction of the Readfield Town
Charter into the record. What is in the record is the Town of
Readfield Personnel Policy. (Amended & Adopted 06/13/2013).
This document contains the recitation that it was adopted by
the Readfield Select Board and I hold that it constitutes an
"ordinance or resolution," within the meaning of § 962(6)(B) of
the Act. The policy does not mention the appointment or hiring of
a Town Clerk nor does it determine a term of office for the Clerk.
In the present case, the record is clear that the Town Manager
appointed the Town Clerk. In the absence of a controlling Town
ordinance or resolution, I conclude that the Town Clerk was
appointed to office by the Town Manager, pursuant to the
provisions of 30-A M.R.S.A. § 2636 cited above.
As directed by the Board in Topsham, No. 02-UCA-01, at 7-9, I
must now examine the "statute, ordinance or resolution," pursuant
to which the appointment of the Town Clerk was made, to determine
whether the remaining element required for a § 962(6)(B)
exclusionary designation--a specified term of office--has been
met. As there was no Town ordinance or resolution addressing the
term of office for the Town Clerk, the general provision of 30-A
M.R.S.A. § 2601 (2) applies.[fn]2 That subsection states that "unless
2 Title 30-A § 2601. Appointment and term of officials; generally
1. Appointment of officials and employees. Except where specifically
provided by law, charter or ordinance, the municipal officers shall appoint all
municipal officials and employees required by general law, charter or ordinance
and may remove those officials and employees for cause, after notice and
hearing.
2. Term of officials. Unless otherwise specified, the term of all
municipal officials is one year.
[end of page 7]
otherwise specified, the term of all municipal officials is one
year."
The uncontroverted evidence in the record is that, since
initially re-hired 11 years ago, the incumbent Town Clerk has been
re-appointed annually.[fn]3 The incumbent Clerk's annual appointments
have been memorialized by written certificates of appointment,
signed by the Town Manager, and including an oath of office.
I conclude that the Town Clerk is appointed to office by the
executive head of the Town for a specified term of office.
Consequently, the Town Clerk is excluded from the statutory
definition of public employee pursuant 26 M.R.S.A. § 962
(6)(B) and cannot be included in any bargaining unit. 26 M.R.S.A. § 966(1).
2. Is the Town Clerk in Readfield a department or division head
appointed to office within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962
(6)(D)?
Given that the Town Clerk is excluded under § 962(6)(B) as an
appointed official, it is not necessary to make a determination on
the status of the same position under the department head
exclusion. I will, however, go ahead and make my determination as
it will be a quick analysis. Unlike the statutory authority for a
town manager to appoint town officials, the Town Manager Plan Law
requires that a town manager's department-head appointments be
confirmed by the select board. 30-A M.R.S.A. § 2636 (5). No
evidence was presented that the Town Clerk's appointment was ever
ratified by the Select Board in this case. Thus, the Town Clerk
is not eligible for an exclusionary designation pursuant to
26 M.R.S.A. § 962 (6)(D).
3. Is the Board Secretary a "confidential" employee, within the
meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. § 962(6)(C)?
3 The Town Clerk also testified that her predecessor was appointed annually
during that person's 25-year tenure as the Town Clerk.
[end of page 8]
Section 962(6)(C) of the Act excludes from the definition of
covered public employees,
. . . any person [w]hose duties as deputy, administrative
assistant or secretary necessarily imply a confidential
relationship to the executive head, body, department head
or division head.
The Board bases exclusionary designations on the actual job duties
of a position, not speculative duties or assignments that the
employer has planned for the person in the future. Maine State
Employees Association and County of York, No. 04-UD-04, at 19
(Mar. 30, 2004); aff'd, No. 04-UDA-01 (Oct. 8, 2004). Here, the
Secretary attends all Select Board meetings and prepares the
required minutes and records of Board votes. The Board Secretary
testified, however, that she had been in the position for four
years and had never been invited to attend an executive session.
The exception for confidential employees is not intended to
exclude employees with access to information legitimately
considered confidential for other purposes. For the purposes
of Maine's collective bargaining statute, the confidential
information must have a labor relations nexus above and beyond
contract administration. The exclusion is warranted for those
employees who, as an inherent part of their job responsibilities,
have access to the employer's bargaining positions, before that
information is disclosed at the bargaining table, and who assist
and act in a confidential capacity with persons who formulate or
determine the employer's bargaining positions or strategy. See,
e.g., MSEA and York County, No. 04-UD-04, at 21.
In the instant case, the Board Secretary has not been asked
to attend executive sessions of the Select Board during her four
years in the position. There was no evidence in the record that
[end of page 9]
the secretary had access to the Town's bargaining positions or
strategies. This is not surprising, as there was no evidence that
any other employees in the Town are represented by a bargaining
agent--something that typically precedes the creation of
confidential labor relations information within the scope of the
labor nexus test. I conclude that the Board Secretary is not a
confidential employee within the meaning of § 962(6)(C), and is
eligible for inclusion in a bargaining unit.
4. Can the fact that the Finance Officer serves as the acting
town manager when the Town Manager is away serve as the
reason for excluding that position from any bargaining unit?
The evidence in the record is that the Town Manager usually
takes two-week vacations at least once and usually twice a year.
In addition, the Town Manager was absent from the Town for
approximately one month twice over a 6-year period. During each
of these absences, the Town Manager has designated the Finance
Officer to serve as the Acting Town Manager, the nomination was
confirmed by the Select Board as required by 30-A M.R.S.A. § 2634,
and the Finance Officer received additional pay while in the
acting capacity. The evidence is clear that the primary functions
of the position of the Finance Director are administrative
functions and not managing and directing the affairs of the Town
of Readfield. The question presented is whether the occasional
status as "Acting Town Manager" justifies exempting the Finance
Director from the protections of the Act.
Similar circumstances were considered by the hearing examiner
in MSEA and York County, where the employer argued that, since the
deputy registers of deeds and probate filled-in for absent
registers, the deputies should be exempt from the coverage of the
Act as department heads. MSEA and York County, 04-UD-04, at 17-20.
In determining whether a position should be excluded from the
[end of page 10]
definition of public employee, the hearing examiner needs to focus
on the duties of the position itself while understanding that, for
instance, a deputy department head might reasonably be required to
act in the place of the department head, including signing
documents, attending meetings normally attended by the department
head, and assuming a larger supervisory role in the department
head's absence. Such temporary assignments do not alter the
responsibility of the department head to manage and direct the
affairs of the department, even if they are on vacation or are on
leave for some other personal reason. Citing relevant Board
precedent, the hearing examiner in York County stated:
The Board has found that assigning an employee on a
temporary basis to an excludable position does not justify
excluding that employee's normal or original position from
a bargaining unit. Maine Dept. of Public Safety and MSEA,
No. 83-UC-45 and 91-UC-45, slip op. at 28 (MLRB Feb. 4,
1994),aff'd, No. 94-UCA-01 (MLRB July 1, 1994); Maine
Dept. of Transportation and MSEA, No. 83-UC-36, slip op.
at 42 (MLRB Apr. 11, 1986) (applying this principle to
temporary assignments lasting as much as one year).
MSEA and York County, No. 04-UD-04, at 20. Applying this
precedent, the hearing examiner concluded that a deputy register
of deeds, who acted in place of the register who had been
completely absent from the workplace for 11 months, was not, by
virtue of that fact, a department head within the meaning of § 962
(6)(D) of the Act. As noted above, the Board affirmed this
decision. Applying the same reasoning here, the position of
Finance Officer is not excluded from the coverage of the Act by
virtue of serving as the Acting Town Manager and is therefore a
public employee eligible for inclusion in a bargaining unit.
[end of page 11]
Community of interest analysis
In order to constitute a bargaining unit which is appropriate
for purposes of collective bargaining, the several positions
involved in the proposed unit must share a clear and identifiable
community of interest. 26 M.R.S.A. § 966 (2). It is well
established that the Hearing Examiner's duty is to determine
whether the proposed bargaining unit is an appropriate unit, not
the most appropriate unit. See Town of Yarmouth and Teamsters
Local Union No. 48, No. 80-A-04, at 4 (June 16, 1980), and
Portland Superintending School Committee v. Portland
Administrative Employee Assoc., No. 87-A-03 (May 29, 1987),
affirming No. 86-UD-14.
There was some confusion when the petition was filed as to
how to properly label the positions proposed to be included.
These issues have been clarified and I hold that the positions in
the proposed bargaining unit in this case are: Collections Clerk
[Deborah Nichols, incumbent], Board Secretary [Deborah Nichols,
incumbent], Finance Officer [Teresa Shaw, incumbent], Head of
Maintenance [Mark Birtwell, incumbent], Assistant Transfer Station
Manager [Glen Hawes, incumbent], Transfer Station Attendant
[Michael Moranger, incumbent], Sexton [Karen Peterson, incumbent],
Animal Control Officer [Karen Peterson, incumbent], Lakes Region
Mutual Aid Fire Departments' Administrative Assistant [Karen
Peterson, incumbent], and Reserve Office Administrative,
Maintenance, and Transfer Station Employee [Karen Peterson,
incumbent]. The factors used in evaluating the requisite
community of interest are set forth in Chapter 11, § 22(3) of the
Board's Rules and Procedures. The facts in the record relating to
each factor are set forth below.
[end of page 12]
1. Similarity in the kind of work performed
There are two distinct types of work performed by the
employees proposed to be included in the single bargaining unit.
The work of the Head of Maintenance, Assistant Transfer Station
Manager, Transfer Station Attendant, Sexton, Animal Control
Officer, Fire Department Administrative Assistant, and Reserve
Office Administrative, Maintenance and Transfer Station Employee
is primarily physical or manual in nature, with varying amounts
of record-keeping and other administrative tasks also required.
The work of the Collections Clerk, Board Secretary, and Finance
Officer is almost exclusively administrative in nature, with
minimal physical requirements.
2. Common supervision and determination of labor relations
policy.
All employees are supervised directly by the Town Manager,
including supervision performed in the Town Manager's added
responsibilities as Road Commissioner and Transfer Station
Director. The labor relations policies for all of the employees
is determined by the Select Board and are included in the Town
of Readfield Personnel Policy.
3. Similarity in the scale and manner of determining earnings
All employees are compensated on an hourly basis. See, TYPES
OF EMPLOYMENT, TIME KEEPING, and WORK WEEK/OVERTIME articles of
the personnel policy. Individual employee compensation is set
annually by the Select Board to coincide with the beginning of the
town's fiscal year, after they receive "a lump sum recommendation
on compensation from the Town Manager." See, COMPENSATION article
of the personnel policy. This demonstrates a similarity in the
manner of determining earnings. The hourly compensation rates for
the ACO and for the Finance Officer are part of the record;
however, those for the other employees are not. From the evidence
[end of page 13]
in the record it is not possible to determine the range from the
lowest to the highest-paid employee.
4. Similarity in employment benefits, hours of work and other
terms and conditions of employment
Only the ACO, Head of Maintenance, and Transfer Station
employees receive a clothing allowance. All of the employees at
issue are entitled to the following benefits as defined in the
personnel policy: leave without pay, bereavement leave, course
reimbursement, family medical leave, family military leave, income
protection plan, jury duty leave, paid holidays, Legislative
leave, library card, life insurance, medical & dental insurance,
mileage reimbursement, military leave, professional dues,
retirement plan, sick leave, vacation, witness leave, and paid
storm days and delays.
The evidence regarding the hours of work for each
classification was somewhat ambiguous. The Town Manager testified
that the transfer station schedule is as follows. The facility is
closed Sundays and Mondays. Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Fridays it
is open from 11:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.; Thursdays it is closed to
the public, but open to commercial haulers from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00
p.m.; and on Saturdays it is open from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Only the transfer station employees work this schedule. The town
office is open to the public at 8:30 a.m., four days per week and
the Collections Clerk and Finance Officer work that schedule.
On days when she performs janitorial work at the town office, the
Sexton starts work at "7-ish," in order to complete the cleaning
duties before the public arrives and so as not to interfere with
the work of the three town office administrative employees.
In addition to her regularly-scheduled work as Sexton, Fire
Department Administrative Assistant and general reserve employee
[end of page 14]
(assisting virtually all of the employees in the other
classifications), the ACO responds to citizen animal calls 24/7.
Overall, there is a similarity in employment benefits and
hours of work, with all working day shifts (and an occasional
citizen animal complaint). The only notable difference in terms
and conditions of employment are those related to manual versus
office work, such as the clothing allowance.
5. Similarity in the qualifications, skills and training of
employees
The minimum educational requirement for all of the employee
positions at issue is graduation from high school. The Finance
Officer position is the only one for which a four-year degree (in
accounting) is mentioned as a minimum educational qualification
in the position description; however, a high school diploma and
"significant practical experience in accounting practices, or any
equivalent combination of experience and training" may be
substituted for the degree requirement.
Most of the positions involve some kind of State
certification or licensure. The Collections Clerk serves as a
Deputy Town Clerk and received the training to qualify to become
a certified town clerk through attendance at training sponsored
by the Maine Municipal Association ("MMA"). The Finance Officer
received training in budgeting through MMA. These training
opportunities were conducted off-site. The Fire Department
Administrative Assistant, along with the Finance Officer and the
Collections Clerk, attended on-site computer training presented
by MMA.
Others gained the training from various State agencies in
order to obtain certification required or helpful to perform
[end of page 15]
their respective job duties. The Head of Maintenance received
instruction as a local project administrator and "a lot" of
other training from the Maine Department of Transportation.
The Maintenance employee also received OSHA 10 training from the
Maine Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Standards ("BLS") while
employed with the Town of Wayne and received individual training
on using RSMS, computerized road maintenance scheduling software,
from a Readfield resident. The transfer station employees,
including Ms. Peterson when she was the Transfer Station
Attendant, received training necessary for certification as a
Transfer Station Operator from the Maine Department of
Environmental Protection. The Animal Control Officer and
Mr. Birtwell, as the Alternate Animal Control Officer, have
completed the Basic Animal Control 24-hour course at the Maine
Criminal Justice Academy. The Lakes Region Mutual Aid Fire
Departments' Administrative Assistant has received training and
instruction in OSHA record-keeping requirements from BLS.
While each position requires some sort of specialized
training, in all instances it is the sort of instruction that can
be gained through seminars and other short-duration programs,
supplemented by on-the-job experience. Any difference in scope
of training required is minimal and does not create a divergence
of interests among the employees.
6. Frequency of contact or interchange among the employees.
The Collections Clerk and the Finance Officer work in the
same area in the town office and work together with frequent
contact and interchange. The Head of Maintenance and the ACO
share an office in another part of the town office and have
frequent contact with each other. The ACO fills in in the
administrative area of the town office as required, constituting
approximately 3 percent of her work time, and also spends about
[end of page 16]
5 percent of her work time filling in at the transfer station.
The town maintenance building is located on the grounds of the
transfer station; so, while not actually performing transfer
station tasks, the Head of Maintenance has casual contact with the
transfer station employees in addition to any interchange he may
have with them when he performs maintenance and repair of transfer
station equipment. The transfer station employees work at the
same facility and are in constant interchange, working together.
No evidence was presented regarding the contact or interchange,
if any, between the town administrative staff and the transfer
station employees.
7. Geographic proximity.
The employees involved in this case have three distinct work
sites. The Collections Clerk and the Finance Officer work at the
town office, as do the ACO and Head of Maintenance, albeit in a
different part of the town office. The Head of Maintenance and
the Sexton work in the field all over town, with the former
working on town roads and plowing and sanding town parking lots
and the latter working on town cemeteries and performing
maintenance work in all town buildings. The transfer station
employees work exclusively at that location and the ACO/Sexton and
the Head of Maintenance also perform some work there. There was
no evidence suggesting that these different work locations created
any divergent or conflicting interests with respect to terms and
conditions of employment.
8. History of collective bargaining
There is no evidence in the record regarding any collective
bargaining history.
9. Desires of the affected employees
[end of page 17]
The employees who testified at the unit determination
proceeding, the Collections Clerk, the Finance Officer, the ACO/
Sexton/Fire Department Administrative Assistant, and the Head of
Maintenance, all expressed a desire to vote on whether to be
represented for purposes of collective bargaining.
10. Extent of union organization
The Union seeks to represent a group of full-time public
employees employed by the Town. There was no evidence presented
regarding whether the Town has any other employees, and, if so,
whether they are organized.
11. Employer's organizational structure
The record established that the Town Manager is the executive
head of the Town, who is the direct supervisor for all of the
persons in the positions at issue in the Union's petition, either
in his capacity as Town Manager, as the Transfer Station Manager,
or as the Road Commissioner. The Town's administrative functions,
including maintaining voter registrations, creating and
maintaining vital records, issuing various licenses, collecting
taxes, and maintaining the accounting system, are performed by the
appointed Town Clerk and two employees, the Finance Officer and
the Collections Clerk, who work together performing these tasks
and are assisted by the ACO on an as-needed basis. The Head of
Maintenance and the ACO/Sexton maintain the Town's buildings and
properties directly or by supervising the work of part-time
seasonal employees or contractors. The transfer station is a
separate self-contained facility. The Town once had a public
works department for which the Head of Maintenance worked as
foreman, but now contracts for that work under the general
direction of the Town Manager, as Road Commissioner, and close
monitoring by the Head of Maintenance.
[end of page 18]
SUMMARY: Community of interest evaluation and conclusion
After reviewing the evidence in the record concerning the
eleven community-of-interest factors, I conclude that the
petitioned-for bargaining unit is an appropriate bargaining unit.
The evidence supports my finding of strong similarities with
respect to the majority of community of interest factors,
including factors number 2 (common supervision and determination
of labor relations policy), number 3 (manner of determining
earnings), number 4 (employment benefits, hours), number 5
(qualifications, skills, and training), and number 11
(organizational structure). There are some unknowns within these
factors, such as the scale of earnings, and whether there are
terms and conditions of employment related to the manual work
beyond a clothing allowance. Two of the factors, number 8
(history of collective bargaining), and number 11 (extent of
unionization) have a neutral effect on the analysis. The three
remaining factors, number 1 (similarity in the type of work),
number 6 (frequency of contact and interchange), and number 7
(geographic proximity) are all related to the office work/manual
labor distinction. While these factors militate somewhat against
finding an overall community of interest among the positions in
the petitioned-for bargaining unit, I conclude that any potential
divergence in interests is speculative and not demonstrated by the
evidence. The petitioned-for bargaining unit is what the
employees believe will best achieve their objective in exercising
their representational and bargaining rights. I conclude that the
bargaining unit as proposed is an appropriate bargaining unit.[fn]4
4 The showing of interest submitted by the Union with the petition
has been examined based on the positions included in this unit determination and is
sufficient to warrant a secret ballot election.
[end of page 19]
ORDER
On the basis of the foregoing facts and discussion and
pursuant to the provisions of 26 M.R.S.A. § 966, the following
described unit is held to be appropriate for purposes of
collective bargaining:
INCLUDED: Collections Clerk, Board Secretary, Finance
Officer, Head of Maintenance, Assistant Transfer
Station Manager, Transfer Station Attendant,
Readfield Cemetery Sexton, Animal Control Officer,
Lakes Region Mutual Aid Fire Departments'
Administrative Assistant, and Reserve Office
Administrative, Maintenance, & Transfer Station
Employee.
EXCLUDED: Town Clerk and all other employees of the Town
of Readfield.
A bargaining agent election for this unit will be conducted
forthwith.
Dated at Augusta, Maine, this 19th day of September, 2014.
MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
/s/_____________________________
Marc P. Ayotte
Hearing Examiner
The parties are hereby advised of their right, pursuant to 26
M.R.S.A. § 968(4), 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 Chapter 10 and Chap. 11 § 30 of the Board Rules.
[end of page 20]