ALASKA LABOR RELATIONS AGENCY
3301 EAGLE STREET, SUITE 208
P.O. BOX 107026
ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99510-7026
Fax (907) 269-4898
ALASKA STATE EMPLOYEES ASS’N/ ) AFSCME LOCAL 52, AFL-CIO, ) (Greg Doggett, PCN 10-0119), ) ) Petitioner, ) ) vs. ) ) STATE OF ALASKA, DEPARTMENT ) OF NATURAL RESOURCES, ) ) Respondent, ) and ) ) ALASKA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASS’N/ ) AFT, AFL-CIO, ) Intervenor. ) ________________________________) Case No. 96-471-UC
DECISION AND ORDER NO. 231
Digest: The bargaining unit placement of a data processing manager I position, PCN 10-0119, is appropriately in the supervisory bargaining unit represented by the Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT, AFL-CIO.
Statement of the Case
On November 15, 1995, the Alaska State Employees Association/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO (ASEA) filed this petition to clarify the bargaining unit status of a data processing manager I in the Department of Natural Resources, State Pipeline Coordinator’s Office, after the State of Alaska notified that it intended to move the position to the supervisory bargaining unit. On December 7, 1995, Alfred L. Tamagni, Chair of the Alaska Labor Relations Agency, delegated the authority to hear the case to the hearing officer. On December 7, 1995, Alfred L. Tamagni, Sr., chair, and board members Robert A. Doyle and Raymond P. Smith were assigned to decide the case. On December 18, 1995, ASEA moved for a stay of the proceedings. The State and Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT, AFL-CIO (APEA) both opposed the motion. The hearing officer on January 4, 1996, denied the stay and postponed the hearings. The State on February 15, 1996, filed a motion to dismiss these petitions or in the alternative to obtain a hearing. ASEA opposed the motion on February 27, 1996. On March 6, 1996, the hearing officer denied the motion to dismiss and granted the request for hearings. The State filed a second motion to dismiss on February 22, 1996, which the hearing officer denied on March 6, 1996.
Cases 95-457-UC and 96-471-UC were consolidated for hearing. On March 6, 1996, the hearing was set for the week of April 1-5, 1996. ASEA moved on March 13, 1996, for reassignment of the burden of proof, which was denied on March 27, 1996. The hearing was convened on April 4, 1996, before hearing officer Jean Ward. The record closed on September 27, 1996.
Panel: Alfred L. Tamagni, Sr., chair, and board members Robert A. Doyle and Raymond P. Smith, participating after review of the record.
Appearances: Stan Hafferman, business agent, for petitioner Alaska State Employees Association/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO; Art Chance, labor relations specialist, for respondent State of Alaska; and Dennis Geary, business agent, for intervenor Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT, AFL-CIO.
1. Is the appropriate unit for a data processing manager I (PCN 10-0119) in the supervisory unit or the general government unit?
Summary of the Evidence
The parties presented the following joint exhibits, which were admitted into the record:
A. Position description questionnaire PCN 10-0119 (Oct. 19, 1995);
B. G. Reimer, memorandum to E. Clothier (Feb. 13, 1996) (supervision at JPO);
C. C. Swanson, memorandum to E. Clothier (July 20, 1995) (updating PDQ);
D. L. Wade, memorandum to E. Clothier (Oct. 20, 1995) (bargaining unit review);
E. D. Hull, memorandum to E. Clothier (Aug. 18, 1994) (reclassification);
F. Supervisory responsibilities for PCN 10-0119 (Sept. 27, 1995);
G. Class specification for data processing manager I-III (Mar. 16, 1989);
H. State Pipeline Coordinator’s Office organizational chart (Sept. 26 1995);
I. Extract, ASEA and State agreement (1990-1993) (recognition clause);
J. ASEA and State letter of agreement (1995-1996);
K. Extract, APEA and State agreement (1995-1996) (recognition and definition of terms clauses);
L. APEA and State letter of agreement (1994-1995); and
M. In re Alaska State Employees Ass’n, AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO and State of Alaska, Opinion and Award (Mar. 26, 1996) (Dorsey, Arb.).
Jerry Brossia, State Pipeline Coordinator; Jay Newgaard, supervisor of PCN 10-0119; Gary Reimer, Joint Pipeline Office manager; and the incumbent, Greg Doggett, testified.
C. Agency case file. 8 AAC 97.410.
On March 4, 1996, ASEA filed a statement of issues that included a list of 14 legal issues. Some of the issues were not developed in any meaningful way. Those issues that ASEA did not pursue seriously or support with any authorities or policy are considered abandoned. ASEA expanded on several of the legal issues in its brief filed on March 18, 1996. ASEA also filed motions on March 13, 1996 : (1) to determine whether the moving of persons and positions from the general government unit to positions within the supervisory unit violates the merit system of employment (ASEA withdrew this motion at hearing); (2) to determine the proper definition of a supervisor under the terms of the bargaining agreement between ASEA/AFSCME, Local 52, AFL-CIO and the State of Alaska covering the general government unit employees; (3) to declare 8 AAC 97.990(5) invalid in its application to ASEA/AFSCME, Local 52, AFL-CIO and the State of Alaska; and (4) to determine whether supervisors can be in the same bargaining unit as persons supervised. These issues were addressed in State v. Alaska State Employees Ass’n/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, Decision & Order No. 219 (May 27, 1997), appeal pending No. 3AN-95-9083 CI (Super. Ct., filed June 15, 1997), and Alaska State Employees Ass’n/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO (Fantazzi) v. State, Decision & Order No. 223 (Aug. 7, 1997). We rely on those cases and do not repeat their discussion here.
Findings of Fact
The panel, by a preponderance of the evidence, finds the facts as follows:
1. The Alaska State Employees Association/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO (ASEA) is the recognized bargaining representative of the general government unit of State of Alaska employees. Exhs. I & J.
2. The Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT, AFL-CIO (APEA) is the recognized bargaining representative of the supervisory unit of State of Alaska employees.
Exhs. K & L.
3. PCN 10-0119 is in the Department of Natural Resources, State Pipeline Coordinator’s Office. Greg Doggett is the incumbent and has been in the general government bargaining unit since accepting the data processing manager I position.
4. PCN 10-0119 was formerly a technical engineer II/architect II and in 1994 was reclassified to a data processing manager I to meet the staffing needs of the Joint Pipeline Office at that time. Exh. E.
5. The class specification for data processing manager defines the job class, and supervisory responsibility is an important part of the definition. It provides, in part:
Under general direction, is responsible for administrative activities such as budgeting, reviewing systems and operations, administering contracts, managing a staff of data processing personnel, and acting as the agency liaison to the central data processing management. Directs all phases of a department or division data processing activity or plans and supervises major data processing or development activities for a State agency.
Data processing Managers devote the bulk of their energies to overall management and direction of information systems efforts; work through subordinate supervisors; handle major personnel, administrative and data processing problems; act as liaison between the data processing and program functions of the agency; report to executive management levels on plans, projects and performance. It is expected that these managers prepare and administer budgets; plan and schedule workloads; establish or incorporate policies and procedures; hire, train and organize staff to achieve goals; coordinate between users, specialists and agency program administrators; serve as liaison to statewide information management; monitor and control projects; and are recognized within the work environment as both administrators and high level supervisors. The typical position is the data processing manager for a department with extensive data processing/ information management activities, and data processing managers specializing in technical services (systems programming) data communications, and operations in a large mainframe environment.
These are supervisory classes with substantial responsibility for exercising independent judgement in appointment, promotion, transfer, suspension, discharge and grievance adjudication of subordinates.
6. On October 20, 1995, the Department of Administration indicated that PCN 10-0119 belonged in the supervisory bargaining unit. Exh. D.
7. On October 26, 1995, the State notified ASEA that the data processing manager I, PCN 10-0119, was more appropriately in the supervisory unit. P. Judson, letter to G. Masten.
8. The position description questionnaire for PCN 10-0119 describes the position’s supervisory duties as follows:
Supervision: In conjunction primarily with the above two duty areas, supervisory responsibility for 3 full-time positions, State and Federal, including assignment of work, approval of leave, preparation of performance evaluations, and establishment of priorities and work schedules. Decide on appropriate actions related to employment status and discipline.
Exh. A, at 3.
9. The Joint Pipeline Office where Doggett is employed consists of eleven State and federal agencies operating as a unified agency. State personnel may have full supervisory responsibility for federal positions, including the authority to appoint, promote, transfer, suspend, discharge, settle grievances, approve leave, complete performance evaluations, assign and check work, instruct/train, and set priorities and work schedules. Exh. B.
10. Doggett supervises two federal positions, a computer support specialist, A-6421, and a computer support technician, A-4072. Id., at 2.
11. The level of authority to discipline a federal employee was grieved through the federal system and the outcome was that the State supervisor had the same authority as a federal supervisor would have.
12. Doggett supervises a State employee, PCN 10-0266, in addition to the two federal employees. Exhs. F & H.
13. The supervisory responsibilities questionnaire shows that Doggett has authority to take personnel action for the State employee without being required to inform his supervisor in all areas: appoint, promote, transfer, suspend, discharge, and settle or decide employees. Exh. F.
14. The PDQ shows that Doggett has authority to decide what action is necessary for the State employee that he supervises in all of the categories listed: appoint, promote, transfer, suspend, discharge, grievances, approve leave, complete performance evaluation, assign and check work, instruct/train, and set priorities and work schedules. Exh. A, at 6.
15. Doggett’s immediate supervisor is Jay Newgaard. Exh. H. Newgaard confirmed Doggett’s authority to hire and discipline the State employee Doggett supervises without checking with Newgaard.
16. Doggett’s authority to hire, discipline, and adjudicate grievances was confirmed also by Jerry Brossia, State Pipeline Coordinator, and Gary Reimer, Joint Pipeline Office Manager.
17. Doggett has listed vacancies and hired a State employee, Jeff Hunter, and federal employee, Sylvia Hale. Although he was not required to, he consulted Newgaard before hiring because he believes that it is helpful to get another opinion.
18. Doggett has not had an opportunity to discipline or adjudicate grievances.
19. Despite his authority to settle grievances, Doggett does not believe that he can adjudicate a State employee’s grievance as long as both his and the employee’s position are located in the general government unit because there are rules that require the grievance to be handled by a supervisor who is outside of the bargaining unit.
20. Doggett was hired for the position PCN 10-0119 in 1994. Before his hire he had performed similar work in another position that was in the supervisory unit. He was active in the supervisory bargaining unit, serving in a number of positions. He believes that his position belongs in the supervisory bargaining unit due to its supervisory responsibilities. Doggett had discussed unit placement with Newgaard at the time he accepted the job and they both felt that the data processing manager I position belonged in the supervisory unit. Doggett appears to prefer the supervisory unit.
Conclusions of Law
1. The State of Alaska is a public employer under AS 23.40.250(7), and the Alaska State Employees Association/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, and the Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT, AFL-CIO are organizations under AS 23.40.250(5). This Agency has jurisdiction under AS 23.40.090.
2. The ASEA, as the petitioner, has the burden to prove each element of its case by a preponderance of the evidence. 8 AAC 97.350(f).
3. Under 8 AAC 97.090 a bargaining unit of State employees may not properly combine supervisory personnel with nonsupervisory personnel.
4. We have found a separate supervisory unit to be the appropriate unit for State employees who meet the definition of "supervisory employee" in 8 AAC 97.990(a)(5). State v. Alaska State Employees Ass’n/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, Decision & Order No. 219, at 15-17.
5. Greg Doggett, incumbent in the data processing manager I position, PCN 10-0119, has the authority to act in the interest of the State in the areas of employing, disciplining and grievance adjudication for a State employee that he supervises.
6. Doggett exercised independent judgment in hiring a State employee when the opportunity arose.
7. Supervision of federal employees is not relevant to a determination of supervisory status under 8 AAC 97.990(a)(5), except as it helps show or prove the level of supervisory authority exercised over State employees. See State of Alaska v. Alaska State Employees Ass’n, AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, Decision & Order No. 198, at 3-4, 7-8 (Nov. 15, 1995), remanded Case No. 3 AN 95-9083 CI (Super. Ct., Mar. 25, 1996), decision after remand State of Alaska v. Alaska State Employees Ass’n, AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, Decision & Order No. 219.
8. Under the definition of "supervisory employee" in 8 AAC 97.990(a)(5), PCN 10-0119, is a "supervisory employee."
9. This supervisory responsibility provides a greater community of interest with the supervisory unit than the general government unit.
10. These supervisory duties are significant working conditions that PCN 10-0119 shares with other members of the supervisory unit.
11. Employee preference supports placing PCN 10-0119 in the supervisory unit.
12. Because PCN 10-0119 is a "supervisory employee" it shares a community of interest and working conditions with the supervisory unit despite its previous shared history and contract terms with the general government unit, and under AS 23.40.090, we conclude the appropriate bargaining unit is the supervisory unit.
1. The petition of the Alaska State Employees Association/AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO to declare the data processing manager I PCN 10-0119 appropriately in the general government unit is DENIED;
2. The data processing manager I PCN 10-0119 is appropriately in the supervisory unit; and
3. The State of Alaska is ordered to post a notice of this decision and order at all work sites where members of the bargaining unit affected by the decision and order are employed or, alternatively, serve each employee affected personally. 8 AAC 97.460.
ALASKA LABOR RELATIONS AGENCY
Alfred L. Tamagni Sr., Chair
Robert A. Doyle, Board Member
Raymond P. Smith, Board Member
This order is the final decision of this Agency. Judicial review may be obtained by filing an appeal under Appellate Rule 602(a)(2). Any appeal must be taken within 30 days from the date of filing or distribution of this decision.
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of the order in the matter of ALASKA STATE EMPLOYEES ASS’N/AFSCME LOCAL 52, AFL-CIO, (Greg Doggett, PCN 10-0119) v. STATE OF ALASKA, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES and ALASKA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES ASS’N/AFT, AFL-CIO, Case No. 96-471-UC, dated and filed in the office of the Alaska Labor Relations Agency in Anchorage, Alaska, this 14th day of August, 1997.
Administrative Clerk III
This is to certify that on the 14th day of August, 1997, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was mailed, postage prepaid to
Stan Hafferman, ASEA
Kent Durand, State
Dennis Geary, APEA