P.E.R.C. No. 2000-21, Teaneck Tp

CaptionSTATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of MICHAEL A. DEPOMPEO, : : Appellant, : : -and- : OAL Docket No. CSV 9305-97N : TOWNSHIP OF TEANECK, : : Respondent, : : : TOWNSHIP OF TEANECK, : : Respondent, : : -and- : PERC Docket No. CI-H-97-93 : MICHAEL A. DEPOMPEO, : : Charging Party. : : ¶

AppearancesAppearances: ¶

For the Respondent, Peckar & Abramson, attorneys (Gregory R. Begg, on the motion) ¶

For the Petitioner-Charging Party, Warren & Tosi, attorneys (Lawrence G. Tosi, of counsel) ¶

JOINT DECISION ¶

On February 25, 1997, the Township of Teaneck returned Michael A. DePompeo to his permanent title of firefighter for failing to complete the working test period for the title of fire lieutenant. DePompeo appealed to the Merit System Board. That appeal was transmitted to the Office of Administrative Law as a contested case. ¶

On April 1, 1997, the Township promoted the second person on the promotional list to the position of fire lieutenant and DePompeo filed an objection with the Merit System Board. The Township thereafter removed DePompeo's name from the promotional list and DePompeo appealed that removal to the Merit System Board as well. The Board has indicated that the list removal appeal cannot be decided until the working test period appeal is resolved. ¶

On June 21, 1997, DePompeo filed an unfair practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Commission alleging that his holidays were readjusted in retaliation for his activity protected by the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, N.J.S.A. 34:13A-1 et seq. ¶

The Township moved before the Administrative Law Judge assigned the Merit System Board appeal to have the appeal and the charge consolidated and for a determination that the Merit System Board should have the predominant interest in the conduct and outcome of the consolidated matter. The Township argued that DePompeo's proofs in each case will focus on his alleged association with and support of former union president William Brennan and that the facts and legal issues of each case are intertwined. ¶

DePompeo opposed consolidation, but urged that the two Merit System Board matters be tried at the same time. ¶

The Township filed a reply. It argued that the Judge had no jurisdiction over the list removal appeal because the Board did not send it to OAL for hearing. It also reiterated its position that judicial economy warrants consolidation of the Board and Commission matters. ¶

On July 15, 1999, Administrative Law Judge Jeffrey A. Gerson issued an Initial Decision denying the motion to consolidate. He found that although the parties are identical, the issues are not and that consolidation would not improve the efficiency of justice. ¶

Having independently evaluated the record and considered the Administrative Law Judge's order, the Merit System Board at its meeting on August 31, 1999 and the Chair of the Public Employment Relations Commission, acting pursuant to authority delegated to her by the full Commission, on August 12, 1999 agreed that consolidation of the unfair practice charge and Merit System Board appeals was not warranted. ¶

JOINT ORDER ¶

The motion for consolidation is denied. ¶

DECISION RENDERED BY THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE CHAIR ¶

MERIT SYSTEM BOARD ON OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT ¶

SEPTEMBER 8, 1999 RELATIONS COMMISSION ON ¶

AUGUST 12, 1999 ¶

JANICE M. MINTZ MILLICENT A. WASELL ¶

COMMISSIONER CHAIR ¶