STATE OF MAINE                                  MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
                                                Case No. 90-UD-20
                                                Issued:  April 3, 1990
          

____________________________________          
                                    )
MONMOUTH TEACHERS ASSOCIATION/      )
MTA/NEA,                            )
                                    )
                  Petitioner,       )
                                    )            UNIT DETERMINATION REPORT
              and                   )
                                    )
MONMOUTH SCHOOL COMMITTEE,          )
                                    )
                  Public Employer.  )
____________________________________)

          
     On February 13, 1990, pursuant to Section 966(1) of the Municipal
Public Employees Labor Relations Law (MPELRL), 26 M.R.S.A.  966(1)
(1988) and Maine Labor Relations Board (Board) Unit Determination Rule
1.03, the Monmouth Teachers Association/MTA/NEA (Association) filed a
petition for appropriate unit determination with the Board, seeking to
become the exclusive bargaining agent of a unit of employees of the
Monmouth School Committee (Committee).  The Association proposed the
following unit:
          
     INCLUDED:  All Bus Drivers and Custodian/Maintenance employees
                of the Monmouth School Committee.
          
     EXCLUDED:  All other employees of the Monmouth School Committee.[fn]1
               
     Upon due notice a public evidentiary hearing was convened at 9:00 a.m.
and adjourned at 10:15 a.m. on Tuesday, April 3, 1990, in Augusta, Maine.
Milton Wright of the Maine Teachers Association represented the Association,
and no one appeared on behalf of the Committee.  Unavailing calls were made
to ascertain whether Superintendent Rodney Spearin or anyone else on the
Committee's behalf would attend the hearing.
________________          
          
     1 The petition, which originally proposed a unit of Janitors and Bus
Drivers, was amended at hearing.

                                   [-1-]
____________________________________________________________________________

                               JURISDICTION
          
     The jurisdiction of the hearing examiner to hear this matter and to
issue a report lies in 26 M.R.S.A.  966(1) (1988).
          
          
                                DISCUSSION
          
     Section 966(1) of the MPELRL, 26 M.R.S.A.  966(1) (1988), states that
in the event of a dispute as to the appropriateness of a unit, the executive
director or her designee will make the determination.  In the case at hand,
there is no dispute.  The Committee was notified, by certified mail, of the
time, place and purpose of the hearing.  (The return receipt shows delivery
of the notice letter on March 7, 1990).  The Committee chose not to appear
at the hearing to contest the appropriateness of the unit proposed by the
Association.  There being no dispute, the hearing examiner finds the
requested unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining.
          
          
                                CONCLUSION
          
     There being no dispute as to the appropriateness of the unit proposed
by the Association, the following unit is deemed appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining, within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A.  966
(1988 & Supp. 1989):
          
     INCLUDED:  All Bus Drivers and Custodian/Maintenance employees
                of the Monmouth School Committee.
          
     EXCLUDED:  All other employees of the Monmouth School Committee.
         
Dated at Augusta, Maine, this 3d day of April, 1990.
          
                                     MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD



                                     /s/____________________________________
                                     M. Wayne Jacobs
                                     Designated Hearing Examiner
          
          
The parties are hereby advised of their right, pursuant to 26 M.R.S.A.
 968(4) (1988), 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 the
issuance of this report.  See Board Unit Determination Rule 1.01, Board
General Provisions Rule 6.03.

                                    -2-
____________________________________________________________________________










                                         -2-