STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF )

AMERICA, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 75-1124

) PERC NO. 8H-RC-752-0157

ALACHUA COUNTY, )

)

Public Employer. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to Section 447.307(3)(a), F.S., and Rule 811-3.16, F.A.C., a public hearing was held by the undersigned Hearing Officer in the above matter on August 13, 1975, ate Gainesville, Florida. Notice of Hearing was issued to the parties on July 25, 1975, in accordance with Rule 8H-3.17.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Thomas C. Brown, Esquire

Post Office Box 14481 Gainesville, Florida 32604

For Public Norm La Coe, Esquire Employer: Room 403 County Courthouse

Gainesville, Florida 32691

By petition to PERC, dated June 4, 1975, Petitioner seeks a Certificate of Representation as the exclusive bargaining agent for employees of the Alachua County Corrections Department in the classifications of "Correction Officer I,II,III,IV; Food Service; Recreation Counselor; Counselor. Excluded are the "Director, Assistant Director, Correction Officer V, Secretary.

At the hearing, Petitioner moved to amend the petition to include in the proposed bargaining unit Inmate Consultant and Accounting Clerk I. The motion was granted and the petition so amended. At the outset of the hearing, Mr. Ray Scherer, a representative of Laborers International Union announced that his organization has petitioned PERC for representation of 60 percent of the Alachua County employees but that he did not wish to intervene in this case.

The parties stipulated that the correct name of the Petitioner is that which appears on the petition filed in the case and that the Communication Workers of America, affiliated with AFL-CIO, is an employee organization within the meaning of the Public Employees Relations Act. This stipulation was accepted by the Hearing Officer. The parties also stipulated that the Public Employer is Alachua County and that it comes within the definition of Section 447.002(2) (now 447.203(2)) of the Act. Although the County questioned its status in view of a court case then presently pending involving the question of

whether the County is a co-employer with the Sheriff for his employees, there was no indication that that question is connected with the present case.

The Petitioner on May 20, 1975, in writing (Exhibit 5) requested recognition as bargaining agent for the employees in the requested unit. The Public Employer contends that recognition was not refused, but only held in abeyance pending a county-wide election to be held on August 19, 1975, to determine whether or not county employees wish to accept or reject collective bargaining representation (Exhibits 6,7 & 8).

Formal documents accompanying the file, i.e. Exhibit 1, the Petition; Exhibit 2, Notice of Hearing; Exhibit 3, Affidavit of Compliance for Registration of Employee Organization; and Exhibit 4, Affidavit of Compliance for Required Showing of Interest, were admitted into evidence by the Hearing Officer without objection.

The sole issue to be considered at the hearing was the appropriate bargaining unit of public employees under the provisions of Section 447.307, F.S., and PERC Rule 8H-3.01.

During the course of the hearing, the Alachua County Administrator and the Correctional Assistant Administrator testified for the employer. The Petitioner called one witness, a Correctional Officer I.

Upon inquiry by the Hearing Officer, the Public Employer stated its position that it desired one bargaining unit to represent all county employees to reduce the time and cost spent in bargaining sessions each year; that to grant the petition would create undesirable and unnecessary fragmentation of units; that there was no community of interest among employees in the proposed bargaining unit that is separate and apart from county employees generally; and that certification of the proposed unit would adversely affect county efficiency in dealing with a proliferation of bargaining units.

The Petitioner contended that the employees in the proposed bargaining unit did indeed have a community of interest and should be certified due to the peculiarities of this group as compared to other groups of county employees.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Alachua County Detention and Corrections Department (Exhibit 9) consists of 50 full-time employees (Exhibit 17). Authorized personnel spaces include the Correctional Director, the Correctional Assistant Administrator, the Correctional Inmate Consultant, the Correctional Recreation and Education Consultant, a Correctional Officer V, a Correctional Officer IV, six Correctional Officers III, five Correctional Officers II, and thirty Correctional Officers I (see Exhibit 10). Also authorized are a Secretary III who is the secretary to the Director, three Food Service Employees and one Accounting Clerk I.

   
   

2. Alachua County has a total of about 786 County employees, including constitutional officers such as the Sheriff, Clerk of the Circuit Court, Tax Appraiser, Tax Collector, Supervisor of Elections and the County Commission Staff. This figure includes 91 professional employees. If employees of constitutional officers were excluded from a single bargaining unit for the County, such a unit would consist of 360 employees. The County is under a unified pay plan for all county employees. It retains the services of a pay plan consultant who does an annual review of pay, job descriptions and duties of

   all county employees. It also has a unified classification plan and personnel regulations that govern salaries, work hours, vacation, sick leave, leaves of absence and the like (Exhibits 10,11).

   
   

3. The County Administrator is the chief executive officer for the county and, with respect to the Department of Corrections, supervises basic policies and budgetary functions. The department budget is proposed by the Director of the Department, submitted to the County Administrator for review and corrections, and then approved by the County Commission. The Director implements the plan and can change line items only by permission of the County Administrator and the County Commission.

   
   

4. The only history of prior collective bargaining in the county was recognition of the Sheriff's office on or about May, 1972. The Police Benevolent Association is the bargaining agent for that unit. The position of the County at this time is that it is a co-employer with the Sheriff as to that unit. The current contract with sworn personnel includes about 133 employees. The Police Benevolent Association declined to be included in a county-wide unit of county employees. Alachua County is the subject of special state legislation which permits it to manage funds allocated to constitutional officers such as the Sheriff, Clerk of Circuit Court, Tax Assessor, and Tax Collector for the county (Exhibits 12-15).

   
   

5. The functions of the Corrections Department include the detention of persons awaiting criminal trial, care and housing of prisoners serving sentences, work release and school release programs, classification and diagnostic services, recommendations to the court for referrals to these programs and recommendations for diversionary programs. Unlike most counties, the Corrections Department does not operate within or under the office of the Sheriff. The Department is conducting a modern concept in rehabilitation of offenders through a variety of programs which are designed to re-orient prisoners for more useful lives. To this end, the department secures grants which enable it to fulfill some of these functions. In hiring personnel, it looks for those who have a high school degree and preferably some college work in the social services area. When forming the department in 1973, most of the employees hired came "off the street", although some came from the office of the Sheriff and from other county departments. Correctional Officers carry identification as Special Deputies which empowers them to detain people for corrections only. This status is unique to them. They wear a modified uniform consisting of a blazer, slacks and tie. Correctional Officers carry arms in transporting prisoners to and from court and in supervising their recreational activities outside the correctional facility. The department has tried to get away from a chain of command concept to lessen a law enforcement image.

   Although it has done away with military titles there are still some personnel who use military titles such as Sergeant and Lieutenant in addressing personnel. Employees of the department have their most continuing contacts with the Sheriff's office because they are in the same building and have similar interests in connection with county prisoners.

   
   

6. The Correctional Director is responsible to the County Administrator for all activities, operations and functions of the department. His duties include fiscal, plant, manpower planning, management, organization, staff selection and supervision, policy formulation, the establishment of programs for the department, and for the operation and maintenance of the detention center. He alone has the authority to hire, discharge, promote or discipline personnel of the department. He formulates the budget which is submitted through the County Administrator of the County Commission. He is assisted in the hiring

   process by a panel which includes himself or the Assistant Administrator, another department employee and either the inmate consultant or a faculty member from the University of Florida.

   
   

7. The Assistant Administrator assists the Director by making recommendations as to departmental policy, securing grant applications,. and formulating departmental programs. He also makes recommendations to the Director as to personnel matters and assists in fiscal matters.

   
   

8. The Director holds periodic staff meetings at which the Correctional Officers IV and V usually attend.

   
   

9. The Correctional Officer V is the Commander of the Detention Center and is thus responsible for direct supervision of all personnel and operations at that facility. He carries out operational policy established by the Director in the form of orders and memoranda. He makes budget recommendations to the Director as to necessary equipment but is not directly involved in the budget process. He makes recommendations to the Director concerning all personnel actions affecting the Detention Center, to include leaves, promotions or terminations. He exercises direct supervision over the Correctional Officer IV and the shift commanders (Correctional Officer III).

   
   

10. The Correctional Officer IV is under the general supervision of the Detention Center commander and is responsible for supervision of all logistical and support services of the center. He also assists the Commander in maintaining communication and coordination among shift commanders. He serves as the Acting Commander in the absence of the Correctional Officer V.

    
    

11. The Correctional Officers III have direct supervision of Correctional Officers I and II in the operation of the center and related programs. They serve as shift commanders for three shifts of 8 1/2 hours a day each.

    
    

12. Correctional Officers I and II perform essentially the same duties which involve primary responsibility to maintain physical custody and control of prisoners within the detention facility and while transporting inmates. Their secondary responsibility is support of program goals through communication and observation of behavior and inmate attitude which is reported to the shift commander or treatment staff. The Correctional Officer II also assists in supervision and on the job training for new employees. In the absence of the shift commander, the Correctional Officer II becomes responsible for the functions of the Detention Center and supervision of correctional officers on duty on that shift.

    
    

13. The Correctional Recreation and Education Consultant is preferably an ex-offender who initiates programs and activities for the prisoner population, including various sports and games, competitions among the inmates, and assists the Correctional Inmate Consultant.

    
    

14. The Correctional Inmate Consultant is a member of the personal staff of the Director. It is his responsibility to spend great portions of his workday in direct contact with the inmate population and to advise the Director on matters pertaining to the well-being, health, sanitation and programming activities of the inmates. He assists individual inmates with their problems and makes recommendations to the director concerning work release, furloughs, extra "gain time" and, in certain instances, disciplinary matters. He attends all staff meetings except those involving departmental personnel and advises the Director on matters relating to policies of the department with reference to

    inmate treatment and control. He is an ex-inmate and, in general, advises on the institutional climate.

    
    

15. The Food Service personnel are cooks who prepare food for the institution in the cafeteria. They report to the Correctional Officer IV.

    
    

16. The Secretary III is the secretary to the director of the department who handles confidential matters for him, including meeting agendas, taking and transcribing dictation, minutes of meetings, conferences and other activities.

DISCUSSION

1. The public employer is understandably concerned as to the impact that fragmentation of its employee force into separate bargaining units will have on the efficiency, and economy of operation in the administration of county affairs. There is no question but that a proliferation of units would impose an additional monetary burden on the county government and serve to effect major changes in the present unified personnel regulations and policies, and classification and pay plans. Certainly, the use of such unified methods is easier and cheaper for the county, and, to some extent can provide higher employee morale and fairer results in personnel actions. Interchange of employees is simplified if all are classified alike and paid in the same manner. It also is clear that there are certain jobs occupied by members of the corrections department which are interchangeable with other positions within the country such as that of accounting clerk, food service personnel, recreation consultant and, to a certain degree, Correctional Officers I and II insofar as their duties include the supervision of sports, recreation and rehabilitation programs.

   
   

2. On the other hand, the Alachua County Corrections Department is unique in establishing such a department which is separate and apart from the office of the Sheriff. The department is distinctive from other groups of county employees in that its members perform primarily a law enforcement role in the custody and care of prisoners. Although the wearing of a uniform is not in itself particularly significant, the fact that correctional officers carry arms and identification as special deputies for correction, and are organized along para-military lines with a chain of responsibility including continued use of military titles such as Detention Center Commander and Shift Commander tend to set the unit apart from other normal groupings of county employees. The primary activities of the department take place in an institutional setting which is conducive to an interdependence among its employees and would permit little interchange with the vast majority of other county employees.

   
   

3. It is apparent that the Director, Assistant Administrator and Correctional Officers IV and V occupy positions of supervisory responsibilities which would create probable conflicts of interest in the event they were included in the proposed bargaining unit. In like manner, the shift commanders who are Correctional Officers III have direct supervision over the bulk of the correctional officers and effectively are in charge of the detention facility during their shifts. Their inclusion within the proposed bargaining unit could dilute their authority and create restraints upon their ability to enforce policies and regulations with firmness and impartiality. The Inmate Consultant has been described as a "ombudsman" who, in effect, is a direct link between the Director and the inmates. Because of his close access to the inmate population and the nature of his reports to the director concerning inmate treatment and control on a confidential basis, his inclusion in the bargaining unit could well impair effective communication and create a definite conflict of interest. The

duties of the Secretary III encompass matters of a confidential nature which undoubtedly will involve her presence at meetings and conferences at which labor matters are discussed and policies in that respect are formulated. The Food Service employees and the Accounting Clerk I perform customary duties in those fields of endeavor and have no special community of interest with the technical personnel other than the mere fact of their assignment and physical location in the department.

In accordance with Section 447.307(3)(a), Florida Statutes, no recommendations are submitted.

DONE and ENTERED this 21st day of November, 1975, in Tallahassee, Florida.

THOMAS C. OLDHAM

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Thomas C. Brown, Esquire Post Office Box 14481 Gainesville, Florida 32604

Norm La Coe, Esquire

Room 403 County Courthouse Gainesville, Florida 32691

Docket for Case No: 75-001124

Orders for Case No: 75-001124