P.E.R.C. No. 2026-29, Edison Tp

CaptionSTATE OF NEW JERSEY BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION In the Matter of TOWNSHIP OF EDISON, Petitioner, -and- Docket No. SN-2026-012 IAFF LOCAL 2883, Respondent. ¶

SynopsisSYNOPSIS ¶

The Public Employment Relations Commission grants, in part, and denies, in part, a request for a restraint of binding arbitration of a grievance filed by IAFF Local 2883 against the Township of Edison. The grievance alleges that the Township violated the parties’ CNA when it temporarily transferred a sworn Fire Officer to the Fire Marshal position, which had recently been held by a civilian, and did not correctly compensate the employee for performing higher out-of-title work. The Commission restrains arbitration to the extent the grievance challenges the Township’s managerial prerogative to set the qualifications for the Fire Marshal position and transfer a specially qualified employee to that position. The Commission finds the grievance legally arbitrable as to the severable compensation claim. ¶

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 TOWNSHIP OF EDISON, Petitioner, -and- Docket No. SN-2026-012 IAFF LOCAL 2883, Respondent. ¶

AppearancesAppearances: ¶

For the Petitioner, Ruderman & Roth, LLC, attorneys (Allan C. Roth, of counsel) ¶

For the Respondent, Cohen, Leder, Montalbano & Connaughton, LLC, attorneys (Matthew G. Connaughton, of counsel) ¶

DECISION ¶

On September 29, 2025, the Township of Edison (Township) filed a scope of negotiations petition seeking a restraint of binding arbitration of a grievance filed by the International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 2883 (IAFF). The grievance asserts that the Township violated the parties’ collective negotiations agreement (CNA) by assigning the grievant as Fire Marshal in the Fire Prevention Bureau. ¶

The Township filed a brief, an exhibit, and the certification of Fire Chief Andrew Toth. The IAFF filed a brief, exhibits, and the certification of its President, Kevin O’ Grady. These facts appear. ¶

The IAFF represents the Township’s Fire Officers, with exclusion of Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief, Inspectors and Firefighters. The Township and IAFF were parties to a CNA in effect from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2022. The grievance procedure ended in binding arbitration. ¶

The Chief certifies that the Fire Department’s Division of Administration includes the subdivisions of Fire Administration, Training and Maintenance, and Fire Prevention. The supervisor of the Fire Prevention Bureau historically was a sworn fire officer, but in recent times, the position was held by a civilian. ¶

The Chief further certifies that he determined the Fire Prevention Bureau was not being operated efficiently and the Fire Marshal resigned. On February 29, 2024, the Chief temporarily assigned Captain DiNuzzo to the position of Fire Marshal based on his qualifications, which included holding the necessary certifications of Fire Inspector and Fire Official, past experience with the New Jersey State Division of Fire Safety, and supervisory skills. ¶

The IAFF President certifies that the Fire Marshal position was formerly known as “Chief Fire Inspector” and compensated at the Battalion Chief rate of pay. He further certifies that it was excluded from the negotiations unit following the expiration of the 2010-2013 CNA, which coincides with the position being held by a civilian. ¶

After Captain DiNuzzo was transferred, the then-IAFF President contacted the Township seeking to have Captain DiNuzzo compensated at the Battalion Chief rate instead of his regular Captain salary, consistent with the last time a sworn officer served as Chief Fire Inspector/Fire Marshal. On June 10, 2024, the IAFF filed a grievance claiming that Captain DiNuzzo “was reassigned to a position, that is outside of the collective bargaining agreement” in violation of the CNA and sought a make- whole remedy for all economic losses incurred. This petition ensued. ¶

Our jurisdiction is narrow. The Commission is addressing the abstract issue of whether the subject matter in dispute is within the scope of collective negotiations. We do not consider the merits of the grievance or any contractual defenses that the employer may have. Ridgefield Park Ed. Ass’n v. Ridgefield Park Bd. of Ed., 78 N.J. 144, 154 (1978). ¶

The scope of negotiations for police officers and firefighters is broader than for other public employees because N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16 provides for a permissive as well as a mandatory category of negotiations. Paterson Police PBA No. 1 v. City of Paterson, 87 N.J. 78, 92-93 (1981), outlines the steps of a scope of negotiations analysis for firefighters and police: ¶

First, it must be determined whether the particular item in dispute is controlled by a specific statute or regulation. If it is, the parties may not include any inconsistent term in their agreement. State v. State Supervisory Employees Ass’n, 78 N.J. 54, 81 (l978). If an item is not mandated by statute or regulation but is within the general discretionary powers of a public employer, the next step is to determine whether it is a term or condition of employment as we have defined that phrase. An item that intimately and directly affects the work and welfare of police and firefighters, like any other public employees, and on which negotiated agreement would not significantly interfere with the exercise of inherent or express management prerogatives is mandatorily negotiable. In a case involving police and firefighters, if an item is not mandatorily negotiable, one last determination must be made. If it places substantial limitations on government’s policymaking powers, the item must always remain within managerial prerogatives and cannot be bargained away. However, if these governmental powers remain essentially unfettered by agreement on that item, then it is permissively negotiable. ¶

Arbitration is permitted if the subject of the grievance is mandatorily or permissively negotiable. See Middletown Tp., P.E.R.C. No. 82-90, 8 NJPER 227 (¶13095 1982), aff’d (App. Div. 1983). Thus, if a grievance is either mandatorily or permissively negotiable, then an arbitrator can determine whether the grievance should be sustained or dismissed. ¶

The Township argues that it has the managerial prerogative to transfer and assign personnel as it sees fit to carry out operations. The Township contends that arbitrators may not second-guess employers who assign employees with special skills and qualifications, such as Captain DiNuzzo, where those qualifications are essential to government operations. Moreover, the Township avers that it has the managerial prerogative to determine the criteria for selection of employees, which includes the reinstated requirement that the Fire Marshal be a sworn fire officer. ¶

In opposition, the IAFF argues that the DiNuzzo’s transfer may be arbitrated because it does not involve an emergency situation, nor is DiNuzzo uniquely qualified for the position, considering that a civilian has held the Fire Marshal position for over a decade. The IAFF also contends that the dispute regarding DiNuzzo’s compensation rate is arbitrable, because DiNuzzo is working in a position outside of the negotiations unit that had historically been paid at the Battalion Chief salary. ¶

Presented with the issue of whether the IAFF’s grievance challenging DiNuzzo’s transfer and compensation is legally arbitrable, we restrain arbitration to the extent that it seeks to restrict the Township from assigning DiNuzzo as Fire Marshal as the assignment of specially qualified personnel is a non- negotiable managerial prerogative. We decline to restrain arbitration over the severable compensation claim for out-of- title pay. ¶

We “have consistently held that public employers have a managerial prerogative to determine the qualifications required for a job.” Rockaway Valley Reg. Sewerage Auth., P.E.R.C. No. 2017-3, 43 NJPER 69 (¶17 2016) (citations omitted). Managerial prerogative extends to the “determination as to whether a particular license is required or desirable for a position.” Ibid. (citing Livingston Tp., P.E.R.C. No. 2016-26, 42 NJPER 228 (¶64 2015); West Windsor-Plainsboro Bd. of Ed., P.E.R.C. No. 2000-26, 25 NJPER 436 (¶30191 1999). ¶

It is also well-settled that “an employer has a non- negotiable managerial prerogative to transfer employees based on its assessment of the employee’s qualifications and abilities to do the work” required. Hudson Cty., P.E.R.C. No. 2025-22, 51 NJPER 190 (¶48 2024) (citing In re Local 95, IFPTE and State of New Jersey, 88 N.J. 393 (1982); Ridgefield Park, supra.). ¶

Here, the Township determined that future candidates for the Fire Marshal position would be sworn officers holding both the Fire Inspector and Fire Official certificates. While the Association takes issue with the addition of these requirements, it was within the Township’s managerial authority to unilaterally change the qualifications for the vacant position outside of the negotiations unit. Further, the decision to transfer DiNuzzo to temporarily work as the Township Fire Marshal was a legitimate exercise of the Township’s managerial prerogative, as DiNuzzo held all the necessary certificates for the position, and in the Township’s view, was the best suited candidate based on his experience. Therefore, we restrain arbitration to the extent the grievance challenges the substantive decision to transfer DiNuzzo. ¶

However, disputes surrounding compensation are generally negotiable. See, e.g., State Judiciary (Atlantic/Cape May) P.E.R.C. No. 2008-39, 34 NJPER 4 (¶2 2008) (severable compensations claims negotiable). This principle is inclusive of claims for additional pay for working out-of-class in a higher title. Passaic Valley Water Comm. v. CWA Local 1032 (App. Div. 2006), aff'g P.E.R.C. No. 2005-66, 31 NJPER 121 (¶51 2005); Town of W. New York v. Int’ l Ass’n of Firefighters (Local 1861) (App. Div. 1983), aff’ g P.E.R.C. No. 92-38, 17 NJPER 476 (¶22231 1991). ¶

The IAFF’s claim that DiNuzzo should be compensated at the higher Battalion Chief rate of pay is severable from its claims that DiNuzzo’s transfer violated the CNA. Since negotiations over compensation for working in a higher title are mandatorily negotiable, this aspect of the grievance is legally arbitrable. ¶

OrderORDER ¶

The Township of Edison’s request for a restraint of binding arbitration is granted to the extent the grievance challenges Captain DiNuzzo’s transfer to Fire Marshal. It is denied to the extent it contests his compensation when working as Fire Marshal. ¶

BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION ¶

Chair Hennessy-Shotter, Commissioners Davey, Eaton, Higgins, and Papero voted in favor of this decision. None opposed. Commissioner Hines recused himself. ¶

ISSUED: February 26, 2026 ¶

Trenton, New Jersey ¶