P.E.R.C. No. 2005-77, Gloucester Cty

NJ Public Employment Relations Commission decision P.E.R.C. No. 2005-77, issued June 8, 2005: unfair practice charge, Gloucester Cty. The Chair of the Public Employment Relations Commission and the Merit System Board entered a joint order consolidating an unfair practice charge filed with the Commis

PERC decisions and contracts · Search PERC decisions

A decision of the New Jersey Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC), not of the Civil Service Commission.

Decision: P.E.R.C. No. 2005-77
Issued: June 8, 2005
Employer, as PERC printed it: Gloucester Cty
Docket: CO-2005-105
Kind of decision: Unfair practice charge
Reported at: 31 NJPER 151 (¶67 2005)

Synopsis

As PERC published it.

The Chair of the Public Employment Relations Commission and the Merit System Board entered a joint order consolidating an unfair practice charge filed with the Commission and a disciplinary appeal filed with the Merit System Board. The consolidated case will be heard by an Administrative Law Judge. The Judge's Initial Decision and the record will be forwarded to the Board first to consider and decide all questions within the scope of its predominant interest. If appropriate, the matter will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration of any remaining issues within its jurisdiction.

Issue, as PERC stated it: Uniformed services, police, municipal, county, duty to supply information, promotion/demotion/transfer/discipline, promotion, procedures, other unfiar practices, refusal to supply information

The decision

The panel is the decision as PERC issued it; labels, links and ¶ are ours.

CaptionSTATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of JOSEPH HETZEL, Petitioner, OAL Docket No. CSV 10240-04 -and- Agency Docket No. 2005-1135 COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER, Respondent. COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER, Respondent, -and- PERC Docket No. CO-2005-105 FOP LODGE 97, Charging Party. ¶

SynopsisSYNOPSIS ¶

The Chairman of the Public Employment Relations Commission and the Merit System Board entered a joint order consolidating an unfair practice charge filed with the Commission and a disciplinary appeal filed with the Merit System Board. The consolidated case will be heard by an Administrative Law Judge. The Judge’s Initial Decision and the record will be forwarded to the Board first to consider and decide all questions within the scope of its predominant interest. If appropriate, the matter will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration of any remaining issues within its jurisdiction. ¶

This synopsis is not part of the Commission decision. It has been prepared for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Commission. ¶

AppearancesAppearances: ¶

For the Respondent, Brown & Connery, LLP, (Ila Bhatnagar, of counsel) ¶

For the Petitioner/Charging Party, Fusco & Macaluso, P.A. (Ciro Spina III, of counsel) ¶

DECISION ¶

On August 31, 2004, Joseph Hetzel filed an appeal with the Merit System Board of a determination by the County of Gloucester to suspend him for fifteen days. On October 22, FOP Lodge 97 filed an unfair practice charge alleging that Hetzel’s suspension was intended to discriminate against him and members of Local 97’s executive board. The appeal was transmitted to the Office of Administrative Law and a Complaint on the unfair practice charge was issued. ¶

The respondent filed a notice of motion for consolidation and predominant interest determination. The appellant/charging party supports consolidation and a determination that the Board has the predominant interest in the conduct and outcome of the consolidated matter. ¶

On May 2, 2005, Administrative Law Judge Bruce M. Gorman issued a decision and order consolidating the cases before the ALJ and determining that the Board should have the predominant interest. ¶

Having independently evaluated the record and considered the ALJ's Order, the Board, at its meeting on June 8, 2005 and the Chairman of the Public Employment Relations Commission, acting pursuant to authority delegated to him by the full Commission, on May 19, 2005 determined that the two cases should be consolidated and decided consistent with the procedure requested by both parties. ¶

JOINT ORDER ¶

The Merit System Board appeal and the Public Employment Relations Commission Complaint are consolidated for hearing before the Administrative Law Judge. The ALJ will first offer recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law to both the Public Employment Relations Commission and the Merit System Board, disposing of all issues in controversy through a single initial decision under N.J.A.C. 1:1-18.3 and consistent with N.J.A.C. 1:1-17.8(a); and ¶

Upon transmittal of the initial decision to both agencies, the underlying record will be forwarded to the Board to consider and decide all questions within the scope of its predominant interest; and ¶

If appropriate, the matter will then be forwarded to the Commission for consideration of any remaining issues within its jurisdiction. ¶

DECISION RENDERED BY THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE CHAIRMAN ¶

MERIT SYSTEM BOARD ON OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ¶

June 8, 2005 COMMISSION ON MAY 19, 2005 ¶

Rolando Torres, Jr. Lawrence Henderson ¶

Commissioner Chairman ¶

Merit System Board Public Employment Relations Commission ¶

About this page

Not an official copy. The decision of record is PERC's document page and the PDF PERC published. The text here was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.

Not the Civil Service Commission. PERC is a separate state agency from the Civil Service Commission. It administers the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, which governs collective negotiations in public employment; the Civil Service Commission administers Title 11A, which governs hiring, titles and discipline.

The label is ours. The kind of decision is our reading of the docket and the text. A decision applies the law to its own facts, may since have been appealed or overtaken, and is not a prediction for any other dispute. Nothing here is legal advice.

To report an error on this page, use the contact form.