P.E.R.C. No. 2025-40, Orange Public Library

Notice to employeesNOTICE TO EMPLOYEES PURSUANT TO AN ORDER OF THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION AND IN ORDER TO EFFECTUATE THE POLICIES OF THE NEW JERSEY EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS ACT, AS AMENDED, We hereby notify our negotiations unit that: ¶

CaptionSTATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1031 Charging Party, -and- Docket No. CO-2024-055 ORANGE PUBLIC LIBRARY, Respondent. ¶

SynopsisSYNOPSIS ¶

The Public Employment Relations Commission grants the Communications Workers of America’s (CWA) motion for summary judgment on its unfair practice charge, finding that the Orange Public Library (Library) violated sections 5.4a(1) and (5) of the Act. The Commission finds that it is undisputed that the Library unilaterally increased the salary of an employee without first negotiating with CWA. While the increase in pay was granted because additional work was assigned to the employee, salary is a mandatorily negotiable subject that may not be unilaterally altered by an employer. Thus, the Commission grants relief to CWA, ordering the Library to cease and desist from its unlawful conduct and to negotiate in good faith with CWA. ¶

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. ¶

CaptionSTATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 1031 Charging Party, -and- Docket No. CO-2024-055 ORANGE PUBLIC LIBRARY, Respondent. ¶

AppearancesAppearances: ¶

For the Charging Party, Weissman & Mintz, LLC, attorneys (Steven P. Weissman, of counsel; Patricia Villanueva, on the brief) ¶

For the Respondent, Dan S. Smith, LLC attorneys (Dan S. Smith, of counsel) ¶

DECISION ¶

On October 31, 2023, the Communications Workers of America, Local 1031 (CWA) filed an unfair practice charge (UPC) against the Orange Public Library (Library) alleging that it violated sections 5.4a(1), a(5), and a(7) of the New Jersey Employer- Employee Relations Act (EERA), N.J.S.A. 34:13A-1 et seq.1/, when it unilaterally changed the salary of an employee during the status quo period of an expired collective negotiations agreement (CNA). On February 16, 2024, the Director of Unfair Practices issued a Complaint on only the 5.4a(1) and a(5) claims, and dismissed the a(7) charge. On March 4, 2024, the Library filed an Answer, denying that its conduct violated the Act. ¶

On January 31, 2025, the CWA filed a motion for summary judgment, contending that there is no genuine dispute of material fact as to the issues underlying the Complaint, and that, as a matter of law, it is entitled to a finding that the Library violated the Act and relief. The motion is supported by a brief, exhibits, and the certifications of Kristin Affrime, a CWA National Staff Representative, and Rene Garzon, a Local Staff Representative. ¶

The Library’s opposition brief to the motion was due on February 10, 2025. On February 13, counsel for the Library requested a 30-day extension to file its brief noting it had the consent of the CWA. The Commission Case Administrator granted the Library an extension to file its brief, and required that it be accompanied by a motion to accept the brief as timely filed along with a supporting certification. On March 17, the Library filed its opposition brief, which lacked the required motion and certification. The Commission Case Administrator then directed the Library to submit the required motion by March 19, 2025. To date, counsel for the Library has not filed the required motion. We note that even if the motion was timely filed, it contains no certified facts contesting the CWA’s claims. ¶

With the noted procedural history, we find the following facts. ¶

FINDINGS OF FACT ¶

1. The Library and the CWA are, respectively, a public employer and majority representative within the meaning of the Act. (Compl. ¶1-3, 5-6; Ans. ¶1-2. 5-6). ¶

2. The CWA represents all Librarians, Library Assistants, Maintenance employees, Maintenance/Security employees, Monitors, Principal Library Assistants, Reference Assistants, Senior Librarians and Senior Library Assistants employed by the Library. (Compl. ¶5, Ex. 1; Ans. ¶5). ¶

3. The Library and the CWA are parties to a series of collective negotiations agreements (CNA), the most recent of which covers a period from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2019. (Compl. ¶7; Ans. ¶7). ¶

4. The parties are engaged in negotiations for a successor CNA. (Compl. ¶15; Ans. ¶15). ¶

5. Narine Dhanwa is a building maintenance worker for the Library, whose salary in 2019 was $44,589.50, and $53,000 in 2023. (Compl. ¶11; Ans. ¶11). ¶

6. On May 4, 2023, the Mayor’s Alternate in the Board directed the Library’s bookkeeper to take the following action: ¶

Increase the salary of Narine Dhanwa who will be performing the duties once performed by the assistant maintenance worker for the Orange Public Library, expanding his work responsibilities. His current salary is $42,000 annually and will increase to $53,000 annually. A salary change form will follow this email later today. ¶

[Compl. ¶12; Ans. ¶12.] ¶

7. An electronic record from the Civil Service Commission states that a salary adjustment was made to Dhanwa’s pay effective July 6, 2023. (Affrime Cert., Ex. 1). ¶

8. The Library did not inform the CWA of the change of Dhanwa’s job responsibilities or negotiate the change in Dhanwa’s salary with CWA. (Garzon Cert. ¶13-14). ¶

STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶

Summary judgment will be granted if there are no material facts in dispute and the movant is entitled to relief as a matter of law. Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995); Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co., 17 N.J. 67, 73-75 (1954). N.J.A.C. 19:14-4.8(e) provides: ¶

If it appears from the pleadings, together with the briefs, affidavits and other documents filed that there exists no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant or cross-movant is entitled to its requested relief as a matter of law, the motion or cross-motion for summary judgment may be granted and the requested relief may be ordered. ¶

In determining whether there exists a “genuine issue” of material fact that precludes summary judgment, we must “consider whether the competent evidential materials presented, when viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, are sufficient to permit a rational fact finder to resolve the alleged disputed issue in favor of the non-moving party.” Brill, 142 N.J. at 540. We “must grant all the favorable inferences to the non-movant.” Id. at 536. The summary judgment procedure is not to be used as a substitute for a plenary trial. Baer v. Sorbello, 177 N.J. Super. 183 (App. Div. 1981), certif. denied, 87 N.J. 388 (1981). Summary judgment “should be denied unless the right thereto appears so clearly as to leave no room for controversy.” Saldana v. DeMedio, 275 N.J. Super. 488, 495 (App. Div. 1995). ¶

ARGUMENTS ¶

The CWA argues that salary is the foremost mandatorily negotiable subject and that a public employer may not unilaterally change an existing employment term or working condition concerning compensation, even if it is raising an employee’s salary. The CWA contends that there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Dhanwa’s salary was increased over 18% without agreement of the majority representative and during the status quo period of the expired CNA. Therefore, the CWA contends that it is entitled to summary judgment on its claims and that the Library should be ordered to cease and desist from violating the Act. ¶

In opposition, the Library argues that it did not unilaterally negotiate a salary increase with Dhanwa, and that it merely “gave an employee . . . additional compensation for assuming additional duties and responsibilities” on a temporary basis until a vacant position was filled. The Library also suggests that if the change was a payroll error, the CNA provides “the affected employee should bring it to the attention of the Library Payroll Department” and Dhanwa did not raise the error. ¶

ANALYSIS ¶

The Commission finds that there is no genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the Library changed the salary of Dhanwa without notice to or negotiation with the CWA. Thus, the Commission grants summary judgment in favor of CWA and finds that the Library violated section 5.4a(5) and, derivatively, section 5.4a(1) of the Act. ¶

N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4a(5) prohibits a public employer from “[r]efusing to negotiate in good faith with a majority representative of employees in an appropriate unit concerning terms and conditions of employment in that unit.” This provision bars a public employer from making a unilateral change in working conditions, because “unilateral imposition of working conditions is the antithesis of [the Legislature’s] goal that the terms and conditions of public employment be established through bilateral negotiation, and, to the extent possible, agreement between the public employer and the majority representative of its employees.” Galloway Tp. Bd. of Ed. v. Galloway Tp. Ed. Asso., 78 N.J. 25, 36 (1978). ¶

It is well-settled that “[r]ates of pay and working hours would appear to be items most clearly” considered a term and condition of employment. Bd. of Educ. v. Woodstown-Pilesgrove Reg’ l Educ. Assoc., 81 N.J. 582, 589 (1980). The Commission has consistently held that a unilateral change in salary is an unfair practice. See Trenton Housing Authority, P.E.R.C. No. 82-49, 7 NJPER 677 (¶12305 1981) (unilateral salary increases violated the Act); City of Hackensack, P.E.R.C. No. 2018-54, 45 NJPER 18 (¶5 2018) (unilateral salary increases for some unit members to settle federal lawsuit violated 5.4a(5)). ¶

Here, it is undisputed by the Library that it unilaterally increased the salary of a unit member. When viewing the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, that increase was because Dhanwa was temporarily taking on additional duties due to a vacancy in the assistant maintenance worker position. It is well-settled that additional compensation for additional work is mandatorily negotiable and legally arbitrable. See generally, Woodstown-Pilesgrove Reg’ l Educ. Assoc., 81 N.J. 582, supra; and Tp. of Franklin v. Franklin Tp. PBA Local 154 424 N.J. Super. 369 (App. Div. 2012). Whether or not the unilateral salary increase was temporary is irrelevant in considering whether the Library violated the Act as there is no exception for temporary unilateral changes to mandatorily negotiable terms and conditions of employment. We also find meritless the Library’s argument that the CNA required Dhanwa to complain that his increase in salary was a “payroll error.” The record is clear that Dhanwa’s salary increase was not an error. There is ample evidence that the increase was implemented by the Library to compensate Dhanwa for additional work he absorbed after an unexpected vacancy in another position. ¶

Thus, the decision to increase the salary of one unit member was unlawful because it was made without negotiation and agreement with the majority representative, even where that employee was assigned additional work on a temporary basis. ¶

OrderORDER ¶

CWA Local 1031’s motion for summary judgment is granted. The Commission finds that the Orange Public Library violated N.J.S.A. 34:13A-5.4a(5) and derivatively section 5.4a(1) and orders it to take the following actions: ¶

A. Cease and desist from: ¶

1. Interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by the Act, particularly by unilaterally changing the salaries of employees without negotiation with the CWA. ¶

2. Refusing to negotiate with a majority representative of employees in an appropriate unit concerning terms and conditions of employment of employees in that unit, particularly by unilaterally changing the salaries of employees without negotiation with the CWA. ¶

B. Take the following affirmative action: ¶

1. Negotiate in good faith with the CWA over the terms and conditions of employment of the negotiations unit. ¶

2. Post in all places where notices to employees are customarily posted, copies of the attached notice marked as Appendix A. Copies of such notice shall, after being signed by the Respondent’s authorized representative, be posted immediately and maintained by it for at least sixty (60) consecutive days. Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that such notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by other materials. ¶

3. Notify the Chair of the Commission within twenty (20) days of receipt of this decision what steps the Respondent has taken to comply with this order. ¶

BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ¶

Chair Hennessy-Shotter, Commissioners Ford and Higgins voted in favor of this decision. None opposed. Commissioners Eaton and Kushnir recused themselves. ¶

ISSUED: April 24, 2025 ¶

Trenton, New Jersey ¶

Notice to employeesWE SHALL cease and desist from interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by the Act, particularly by unilaterally changing the salaries of employees without negotiation with the CWA. WE SHALL cease and desist from refusing to negotiate with a majority representative of employees in an appropriate unit concerning terms and conditions of employment of employees in that unit, particularly by unilaterally changing the salaries of employees without negotiation with the CWA. WE SHALL negotiate in good faith with the CWA over the terms and conditions of employment of the negotiations unit. ¶

Note1/ These provisions prohibit public employers, their representatives or agents from: “(1) Interfering with, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them by this act. . . .(5) Refusing to negotiate in good faith with a majority representative of employees in an appropriate unit concerning terms and conditions of employees in that unit, or refusing to process grievances presented by the majority representative....(7) Violating any of the rules and regulations established by the commission.” ¶

Notice to employeesDocket No. CO-2024-055 Orange Public Library (Public Employer) Date: By: This Notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material. If employees have any question concerning this Notice or compliance with its provisions, they may communicate directly with the Public Employment Relations Commission, 495 West State Street, PO Box 429, Trenton, NJ 08625-0429 (609) 292-9830 APPENDIX “A” ¶