STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

TEAMSTERS NUMBER 385, CHAUFFEURS, ) WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 75-304

)

SEMINOLE COUNTY, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A hearing was held pursuant to notice on November 20, 1975, in the Seminole County Courthouse, County Commissioner's Chambers,

301 North Park Boulevard, Sanford, Florida, in the above styled cause. This matter came on to be heard upon the RC Petition filed with the Public Employees Relations Commission by Teamsters, Chauffers, Warehousemen and Helpers Local Number 385, hereinafter referred to as Union or Petitioner; said RC Petition naming Seminole County as the Public Employer.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: THOMAS J. PILACEK, Esquire

Bowles & Pilacek

131 Park Lake Street Orlando, Florida 32803

For Respondent: DAVID RICHESON and

HENRY SWANN, Esquires Alley, Alley & Blue

205 Brush Avenue Tampa, Florida

ISSUES

This matter was referred by the Public Employees Relations Commission to the Division of Administrative Hearings for hearing to determine:

1. Whether the Respondent, Seminole County, is a Public Employer within the meaning of Chapter 447, Florida Statutes.

   
   

2. Whether the Petitioner, Union, is an employee organization within the meaning of Chapter 447, Florida Statutes.

   
   

3. Whether there has been a sufficient showing of interest has required for the filing of a representation election petition under Chapter 447, Florida Statutes.

   
   

4. Whether the employer organization is a properly registered organization with the Public Employees Relations Commission.

   
   

5. What is the appropriate unit of public employees within the Public Employer?

PRE-HEARING MATTERS

Prior to the commencement of the hearing, Respondent filed the following motions with the Hearing Officer who made the indicated disposition of the motion:

1. Motion for Discovery; denied on the basis of prior PERC rulings.

   
   

2. Motion to Transfer Jurisdiction to Local PERC; denied because the local ordinance had not been approved by the Public Employees Relations Commission.

   
   

3. Motion for Oral Argument on Motion to Transfer Jurisdiction; denied, see Petitioner's Motion to Amend, below.

   
   

4. Motion to Dismiss Based on Employer Not Having Denied Recognition; denied.

   
   

5. Motion to Dismiss or Limit Hearing on the Basis that Local PERC Ordinate Controls; denied.

   
   

6. Motion to Dismiss on the Basis of Inappropriateness of Units Sought; denied.

   
   

7. Motion to Quash Hearing on Basis that Acting Chairman Lacked Authority to Notice Hearing; denied.

8. Motion to Dismiss on Basis of Lack of Due Process and Lack of Authority; denied.

The Petitioner moved orally in response to the suggestion that paragraph 11 of the Petition indicated concurrence in local PERC authority to amend paragraph 11 to "no". Motion was granted by the Hearing Officer. After having presented its motions the Respondent thereafter filed its Answer, asserting therein certain affirmative defenses.

Succinctly stated the position of the Respondent was that the county had defined the appropriate units within the Public Employer by local ordinances as professional, supervisory and blue collar, and that the unit sought by the Petitioner did not conform to the units the County had defined by ordinance.

The Petitioner sought all employees of the Road and Arthopod Divisions of Seminole County excluding officers, clericals, supervisory and guard employees.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Hearing Officer directed the Employer to go forward and present its evidence in support of its definition of the units. The Employer sought to call Pat Hill and Jack McLean, both previously subpoenaed by the Employer. Neither of the individuals were present in the hearing room. The Hearing Officer, noting that the time had not expired to oppose the subpoenas but that no opposition had been filed, allowed the Employer to proffer the testimony these witnesses would have given if present. The Hearing Officer notes that subsequently these subpoenas were quashed. Therefore, the proffered testimony will not be considered by the Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer would, in light of the fact that the Commission's file was not present at the hearing, direct the Commission's attention to the proffer as it relates to the Commission's file for resolution of any matters appropriately raised.

   
   

2. The Employer then called Carl Crosslin who was present but whose subpoena had been timely opposed by his Counsel. The subpoena having been issued by the Acting Chairman, the Hearing Officer deferred to the Acting Chairman for his ruling on the subpoena in question. The Hearing Officer allowed the Employer to proffer the testimony which would have been presented by Carl Crosslin and Commissioner Paul Parker. Thereafter, the Employer moved for a continuance which motion was denied by the Hearing Officer.

   
   

3. The Employer then made a demand for presentation of the authorization cards, which were not present at the hearing. The Employer then sought to introduce the affidavit of Chris Haughee which was rejected by the Hearing Officer.

   
   

4. The Employer then filed its motion for Determination of Managerial and Confidential Employees. This motion is preserved for consideration by the Commission.

   
   

5. It is appropriate to note at this point that upon the conclusion of the taking of testimony the Petitioner amended its petition to seek a unit composed of non-exempt employees of the Road Construction and Maintenance Division, the Heavy Equipment and Vehicle Maintenance Division, and Arthopod Division of the Public Works Department of the County of Seminole, or in the alternative, all non-exempt employees of the Public Works Division and as a final alternative, a unit of all blue collar workers of the Public Employer who are in construction, maintenance and trades, but excludes clerical, secretarial and similar positions.

   
   

6. The parties also stipulated to the managerial status of division directors within the Administrative Services Department and their secretaries. However, in light of the fact that not all division directors within the employ of the Public Employer were not included within the stipulation, and further, because the Employer has filed a motion for Determination of Managerial and Confidential Status and because the stipulation between the parties would not be binding upon others who might have an interest, the facts relating to the duties and functions of division directors and similar positions are set forth so that the Public Employees Relations Commission may resolve the status of these employees as it relates to the motion filed by the Public Employer.

   
   

7. The general organization of the Public Employer is indicated on Exhibit 6. The Board of County Commissioners, as the elected representatives of the citizens of Seminole County, head the Public Employer. An executive assistant manages the office and staff of the Board of County Commissioners and functions as general coordinator for the other department heads of the county government. Each of the several departments of government is headed by a department head. Each department head is directly responsible for the management of his department to the Board of County Commissioners. Although the executive assistant, as a coordinator, would have some coordinating function with the

   department heads, the department heads are the first level of management below the Board of County Commissioners.

   
   

8. The department heads prepare the budgets for their department, manage and direct their personal staffs and their division heads, make policy within their department, and participate in the resolution of grievances. They have the authority to hire and fire all employees making less than $10,000 per year and they participate in evaluations of all employees. Department heads have the ability to effectively recommend the employment and discharge of division heads and employees making more than $10,000 per year. All of the department heads meet on Mondays to discuss their joint duties and coordinate their activities.

   
   

9. The division heads or directors have the authority to effectively recommend hiring and firing of personnel. The division heads assign work and determine the manner in which work shall be done by their subordinates. The division heads have the authority to discipline their personnel or effectively recommend disciplinary measures dependent upon the action taken. Division directors prepare and submit budget data to the department heads upon which the departmental budget is based. The division heads constitute the second level of supervision or management in county employment. Among their other functions they make determinations regarding the manner in which programs will be accomplished and participate in the resolution of grievances.

   
   

10. In all but the smallest divisions and in all of the departments, the department heads and division directors have secretaries assigned to them to handle their personal correspondence, In the larger divisions and in the majority of the departments there are additional clerical personnel assigned to handle general typing and filing and to maintain fiscal records. The parties with regard to the RC petition in question have stipulated that the secretaries to the department heads and division directors should be excluded as confidential.

    
    

11. There are divisions within the county government whose function is primarily administrative and whose employees perform administrative duties. These divisions or activities would include the Personnel Division, Microfilm Division, Division of Manpower Planning, Purchasing Division, Office of Management and Evaluation, Veterans' Service Officer, Division of Social Services and Seminole County Industrial Development Authority. In the aforelisted activities, all of the personnel are involved in totally administrative functions.

    
    

12. In addition to these totally administrative divisions or activities, there are additional divisions in which there are mixed administrative and other functions. The administrative employees of these divisions would include Switchboard Operators and the Mail Clerk in Support Services Division; the Biologists in Operations Division of the Department of Environmental Services; the Operator Inspector, Pollution Control Technician, Account Clerk in the Division of Environmental Control of the Department of Environmental Services; Cashiers within the Division of Motor Vehicles of the Department of Public Safety; the Deputy Civil Defense Director in the Division of Civil Defense, Department of Public Safety; Permit Clerks and a Secretary II of the Building Division of the Department of County Development; two Secretaries and a Site Planner within the Office of the Land Development Administrator, Division of Land Development, Department of County Development; a Secretary, two Draftsmen, two Planners, Drafting Technician II, Planner (current plans), Senior Planner, Principal Planner and County Planner within the Planning Division of the Department of County Development.

    
    

13. The following personnel hold positions within the county government below that of division director and perform functions which are not clerical or administrative in nature. These remaining personnel will be discussed by division.

    
    

14. Within the Building Maintenance Division there is a Supervisor of Custodial Services, Supervisor of Courthouse Custodians, and Building Custodian Supervisor, all of whom report to the Director of Building Maintenance. The Supervisor of Courthouse Custodians directly supervises the fifteen custodians assigned to the Seminole County Courthouse. The Supervisor of Custodial Services supervises the custodians assigned to the maintenance of the other county buildings. The Building Custodian Supervisor supervises the electrical, carpentry, plumbing and air conditioning foremen under whose direction maintenance workers perform such maintenance as is required upon the various county buildings. These three supervisors have the authority to effectively recommend hiring, firing and disciplinary action and assign specific work to those employees under their direction. These supervisors constitute the first level of direct supervision over the county employees for although there are trades foremen designated they function as lead workers.

    
    

15. Within the Support Services Division there are three Night Watchmen who are responsible for security of the County Courthouse and one Senior Night Watchman who assigns the work

    shifts of the Watchman. The testimony would indicate that the Senior Night Watchman functions in the role of a lead worker. It should be noted that this Division does not have a division director but is under the control of the acting executive assistant. Within the Division of Human Services is the Office of Animal Control which is headed by the Animal Control Officer. The Animal Control Officer is responsible for the operation of the County Pound and the supervision of the work of the four Animal Control Officers. He is assisted in his functions by the Animal Control Supervisor who is specifically charged with maintenance of the County Pound. The Animal Control Officer has authority to recommend hiring, firing and discipline of these employees who he evaluates.

    
    

16. Within the Operations Division of the Department of Environmental Services there is a Chief Operator and three Operator Trainees who are responsible for the operation and maintenance of the county's water and sewage treatment facilities. The Operator Trainees are under the direct supervision of the Chief Operator whose responsibility is to train then to operate the system and to assign their duties. The Operator Trainees perform maintenance, read meters, and perform such other duties as the Chief Operator assigns necessary to the operation of these facilities.

    
    

17. Within the Office of the Director of Public Safety and under the Director's control is Fire Prevention and Arson Investigator, a Training Officer, and two Mechanics. The Investigator and the Training Officer are trained firefighters. The two Mechanics are physically located at Station 14 and are responsible for the maintenance of the County Fire Department's Vehicles. The Fire Department is divided into three shifts or platoons. Each shift or platoon being supervised by a Sector Fire Coordinator. The Sector Fire Coordinator prepares the budget for his shift, establishes field operating procedures, and directs fire fighting, and has access to the personnel files of the employees. Also within the Department of Public Safety is the Communications Division which at present relates primarily to the Fire Department but which will in the future also encompass the 911 telephone number. The Communications' personnel are under the supervision of the Communications supervisor. The Communications' personnel are generally not firefighters, but receive emergency calls and dispatch equipment.

    
    

18. Within the Motor Vehicle Inspection Division of the Department of Public Safety there are three Inspection Stations located within the county. The Motor Vehicles Inspection function

    is under the supervision of the Motor Vehicles Inspection Supervisor who acts as a division director and effectively recommends hiring and firing and discipline of employees and who helps prepare the budget for the Motor Vehicles Inspection activities. He is also responsible for work assignments and development of work procedures. Each Inspection Station is under the direction of a Chief Inspector who is responsible for assigning work at each station and responsible for the function thereof. There are four Motor Vehicle Inspectors at each Inspection Station and one Cashier.

    
    

19. Within the Division of Parks and Recreation of the Department of County Development there is a Parks Coordinator/Designer who can effectively recommend hiring and firing and disciplinary action of personnel within the Division. The Parks Coordinator/Designer is also responsible for the direct or specific supervision of work. He functions as an assistant division director. The Parks Supervisor is also able to effectively recommend hiring, firing and disciplinary action. The Parks Supervisor provides direct supervision of the five Maintenance Workers, the Equipment Operator II, and three Trades Workers assigned to the Parks and Recreation Division. In addition to the positions enumerated above there are an additional twenty-nine CETA Workers assigned to Parks and Recreation primarily in the grades of Maintenance Worker and Equipment Operator.

    
    

20. Within the Building Division of the Department of County Development the construction inspection function within the county is the responsibility of the Building Official who functions as the division director of the Building Division. He is assisted in his duties by the Plans Examiner who functions as the Deputy Building Official. Both employees have the authority to effectively recommend the hiring, firing and discipline of their subordinate employees. The actual inspection of construction is carried out by one of ten inspectors. There are three Chief Building Inspectors; one assigned to general construction, one to electrical, and one to plumbing, There are six Inspectors who work under the three Chief Inspectors and one Trailer or Mobile Home Inspector who reports directly to the Building Official.

    
    

21. Within the Land Development Division of the Department of County Development is the Zoning Department. The Land Development Administrator functions as the division director. He is assisted in his Duties by the Zoning Administrator who acts as the Assistant Division Director. Both employees have the authority to effectively recommend hiring, firing and disciplinary

    actions. There are three Inspectors assigned to the Land Development Division. One inspects for compliance with the County Tree Ordinance, one inspects with regard to commitments made to the county by developers and the third inspects for violations of the county zoning code.

    
    

22. The Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works is responsible for three basic functions: Traffic engineering, design and survey, and survey and inspection. The Traffic Engineer is responsible for the traffic engineering activity and supervises the other employees directly. Signs are prepared in the County Sign Shop which is under the supervision of the Sign Shop Foreman. An Electrician is also assigned to this activity together with an Electronics Technician. They are responsible for the installation and maintenance of traffic signals. A Radio Technician is also assigned to the Traffic Engineer activity. The Radio Technician is responsible for the repair of all county radios.

    
    

23. The Design and Survey activity consists of a Design Engineer and a Design Technician who design and draft plans for county construction projects.

    
    

24. The Assistant County Engineer heads up the survey and inspection type activity for the Engineering Division. He is responsible for the county's two survey crews which are made up of a Party Chief and three to four crew members. The Assistant County Engineer is responsible for directing the work functions and activities of his subordinates and has the authority to effectively recommend hiring, firing and discipline.

    
    

25. The Assistant Road Superintendent is in charge of the Road Construction and Maintenance Division of the Department of Public Works. He is assisted in the performance of his duties by two foremen and three to four crew leaders. The Road Maintenance function contains three supervisors, two of which supervise a foreman and two crew leaders and the third supervisor who supervises a crew leader. Under each crew leader there are from four to six maintenance workers or equipment operators. The Assistant Road Superintendent and the three supervisors in maintenance all function in assigning work to crews and individuals and supervising the work activity. In addition, the Assistant Road Superintendent acts as the assistant to the Road Superintendent who functions as the division director. Both men would have authority to effectively recommend hiring, firing, and disciplinary action together with the three supervisors,

26. The Division of Heavy Equipment Maintenance is under the supervision of the Shop Foreman who functions as a division director, He is assisted by the Parts Manager who acts as the assistant division director. The position of Chief Mechanic is currently vacant and the duties are being performed by the Assistant Chief Mechanic. The primary function of the Parts Manager is the purchasing and stockage of spare parts. The Shop Foreman, Parts Manager and Assistant Chief Mechanic all have the authority to effectively hire, fire and recommend discipline. These three individuals would also provide evaluations of the mechanics, mechanic helpers and equipment servicemen assigned to the Heavy Equipment Maintenance Division.

    
    

27. The Arthropod Division of Seminole County is responsible for refuse disposal. The division director is the Refuse Superintendent. Working under him are the Refuse Supervisor and a Landfill Foreman. The Landfill Foreman is responsible for supervision of the actual landfill operations and directly is responsible for three Equipment Operator III's and an Equipment Operator IV. The Landfill Foreman is also responsible for supervision of truck drivers while they are at the landfill area. The Landfill Foreman, Refuse Supervisor and Refuse Superintendent (division director) all have the authority to effectively recommend hiring, firing and discipline and to make work assignments and to evaluate performance. There were approximately twenty-eight employees within the Arthropod Division at the time of hearing.

    
    

28. With regard to the employees of the county generally the testimony indicates that all employees of the county are entitled to the same vacation, retirement, and insurance benefits and that their salaries are established within the framework of the pay classification plan. The Petitioner has argued that each division is a totally independent unit, therefore, a unit composed of employees of the Arthropod and Road Construction and Maintenance Divisions of the Department of Public Works would be appropriate.

    
    

29. The Employer has urged that the employees of the county be divided into three units: (1) all professional employees (2) all supervisory employees and (3) all employees not contained in the first two units. The Employer's proposal would appear to lump all the clerical employees, all custodial and maintenance employees, and certain highly skilled or specially trained employees in the same unit.

    
    

30. The record does not support the Petitioner's contention that the divisions of Seminole County government are independent.

    The record clearly indicates that divisions are subordinate to the departments of which they are a part. The record further indicates that even departments are not totally independent or autonomous since the department heads are responsible to the County Commission which in turn establishes the salaries and other benefits of employment for all employees of the county. The record clearly indicates that a unit limited to the Arthropod and Road Divisions or even to the Public Works Department would not encompass many employees with essentially the same job functions and in some instances the same job titles and pay classifications. There are maintenance workers, equipment operators and certain custodial personnel and mechanics located in other divisions of county government. The position of the Employer fails to recognize the disparity of interest between the employees which would be "left over" and compose the third unit it has proposed.

    
    

31. The record indicates that there are essentially three types of employees below the grade or position of division director as follows: (1) Clerical, (2) Maintenance/Custodial, and

    (3) Highly skilled. A large portion of the total number of county employees would fall into the clerical category to include secretaries, clerk typists, filing clerks, and fiscal assistants. The maintenance/custodial category would appear to be the next largest grouping of employees and would include custodial and maintenance workers, vehicle operators, watchmen, and mechanics. The highly or specially skilled category would include various planners, biologists, draftsmen, personnel specialists, zoning and building inspectors, and the highest level of skilled trades workers and sanitariums.

    
    

32. Based upon the foregoing categorization of county employees, the unit composed of maintenance/custodial employees would encompass all of the job titles and job classifications sought by the Petitioner within the Department of Public Works and consolidate a substantial portion of the total number of county employees who share similar duties and work environments. A unit composed of this category would be almost identical to the last alternative unit sought by Petitioner. At the same time it would prevent fractionalization within county government and better meet the criteria stated in Section 447.009(4), Florida Statutes.

This report is respectfully submitted this 11th day of April, 1976.

STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675

COPIES FURNISHED:

Thomas J. Pilacek, Esquire Bowels & Pilacek

131 Hark Lake Street Orlando, Florida 32803

David Richeson, Esquire Alley, Alley & Blue

205 Brush Avenue Tampa, Florida

Henry Swann, Esquire Alley, Alley & Blue

205 Brush Avenue Tampa, Florida

Chairman

Public Employees Relations Commission Suite 300, 2003 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32304

================================================================= AGENCY FINAL ORDER

=================================================================

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

TEAMSTERS NO. 385, CHAUFFERS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS,

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO. 75-304

CASE NO. 8-RC-752-0109

SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA,

Public Employer.

/

DECISION

On April 14, 1975, TEAMSTERS NO. 385, CHAUFFEURS,

WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, Petitioner herein, filed a Petition for Certification pursuant to Section 447.307(2), Florida Statutes (1975) and Florida Administrative Code Rule 8H-3.02.

Pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 447, Florida Statutes, hereinafter the Act, a Hearing Officer from the Division of Administrative Hearings held a public hearing on November 20, 1975 1/ to take evidence on the issues presented by the petition. On April 11, 1976, the Hearing Officer issued a Hearing Officer's Report. SEMINOLE COUNTY, Employer herein, filed exceptions to the Hearing Officer's Report. 2/ Having considered the record and the Hearing Officer's Report in light of those exceptions and oral argument, this Commission hereby overrules the exceptions and affirms the Hearing Officer's findings of fact and rulings on the motions. Subsequent to the June 23, 1976 proceeding, the Employer filed a Motion for Reconsideration and a Motion for Oral Argument. Said motions were considered and DENIED at the September 9, 1976 Commission meeting. Upon consideration of the evidence, this Commission finds that SEMINOLE COUNTY is a Public Employer within the meaning of the Act and that Petitioner is a duly registered employee organization within the contemplation of Fla. Stat. Sections 447.203(10) and 447.305.

In its initial petition, the Employee Organization proposed a unit comprised of all maintenance employees employed in the Seminole County Road Department and Anthropod Division of the Public Works Department exclusive of all office clericals, supervisors and guards. Job classifications encompassed by the petition include heavy equipment operators, truck drivers, laborers, mechanics, working foremen, flagmen, mower operators and warehousemen. However, at the hearing before the Hearing Officer from DOAH, the Petitioner suggested three alternative units, each of which reflect the same exclusions as those in the original petition but seek inclusion of different groups of employees.

No. 1 INCLUDED: All employees in the Seminole.

County Road Construction and Maintenance Division, Heavy Equipment and Vehicle Maintenance Division, and Anthropod Division.

EXCLUDED: All office clerical employees, confidential employees, supervisors, managers, and guards.

No. 2 INCLUDED: All employees in the Seminole

County Public Works Department. EXCLUDED: All office clerical employees, confidential employees, supervisors, managers, and guards.

No. 3 INCLUDED: All blue collar employees

employed by Seminole County.

EXCLUDED: All office clerical employees, confidential employees, supervisors, managers, and guards.

It is the Employer's position that county employees should be separated into three units: (1) professional employees (2) supervisory employees (3) those employees not included in the above-designated units.

Although the record is unclear regarding this matter, during the course of the hearing the parties apparently stipulated to the designation of all department heads and division directors as managerial and all clericals and secretaries reporting to these individuals as confidential. Tr. 52, 262, 345-346, 454. At the same hearing, the Public Employer also filed an application for determination of additional managerial and confidential employees. While the parties in a representation case may properly enter into

stipulations regarding the inclusion or exclusion of certain employee classifications, this Commission need not adhere to such stipulations if they are repugnant to either the language or policies of the Act, and will not do so in the instant case. CWA and Hillsborough County Hospital and Welfare Board, PERC Case No. 8H-RC-752-0175, PERC Order No. 76E-892 (March 25, 1976); District

Council No. 66, IBPAT and Hillsborough County Aviation Authority, PERC Case No. 8H-RC-752-0182, PERC Order No. 76E-897 (April 5, 1976).

In Marion Education Association and Marion County District School Board, PERC Case No. 8H-RA-754-1029, PERC Order No. 76C-16-

22 (April 22, 1975) the Commission noted that:

the right to engage in collective bargaining emanates from the constitution and is merely protected by the statute. Accordingly, a determination . . . regarding

the managerial status of employees has an impact on the constitutional right to engage in collective bargaining. Section [447.203(4)], therefore, will be narrowly construed, [and] anyone asserting a claim of managerial status will have the burden of offering clear and convincing evidence that the

standard criteria have been satisfied.

Therefore, where, as in the instant case, there is no record evidence that would indicate the basis for the Employer's declaration that certain employees are managerial or confidential, any stipulation entered into between the parties with regard to the exclusion of those employees from the proposed bargaining unit can not be honored. Furthermore, this Commission makes no finding as to the managerial/confidential status of the employees in the job classifications listed on the Public Employer's managerial/confidential application. However, this ruling does not preclude the issue from being raised in a later proceeding.

The record reveals that Seminole County is organized along departmental lines and is headed by an elected Board of County Commissioners. Department heads are directly accountable to the County Commission, have the authority to hire and fire all employees earning less than $10,000 per year, can effectively recommend the employment or discharge of individuals with salaries

in excess of $10,000 per year and are responsible for Preparing the budgets for their respective operations.

Departments are Sub-divided into numerous divisions.

Division directors have the power of effective recommendation regarding the hiring and firing of personnel and can discipline employees or effectively recommend disciplinary action depending upon the particular infraction. In addition, division heads assign work and determine the manner in which their subordinates must perform their duties. There are some divisions within the county government that perform primarily administrative functions which are carried out by clerical employees and others, such as the Support Services Division or the Division of Motor Vehicles, that have both clerical and field responsibilities. However, a number of county divisions provide only field services which are performed by blue collar workers.

Record evidence further indicates that all divisions have positions that are either specifically designated as supervisory or that have "supervisory" job responsibilities. Employees in such classifications direct specialized tasks within their particular division. Below the supervisors are rank-and-file blue-collar and clerical employees.

All employees of the Public Employer are under a uniform benefit and compensation plan and receive the same or similar wage rates for performance of similar duties and responsibilities.

Section 447.307(f), Florida Statutes (1975), require that the Commission take into consideration the community of interest among employees when defining an appropriate bargaining unit. Although a similarity in pay grades, benefits and other terms and conditions of employment does not provide conclusive evidence of a community of interest, these factors are relevant add highly persuasive. Unity of interest, common control, interdependence of operations, sameness in character of work and similarity of obligation to the employer must be considered in deciding whether there exists sufficient cohesiveness among a group of employees so as to warrant a separate bargaining unit. Moreover, the mere fact that occupational dissimilarities exist among employees in a proposed unit does not compel the conclusion that the requisite community of interest is wanting. Absent a clear showing that such a degree of conflict exists between classes of employees at the bargaining table, that negotiations would prove meaningless, this Commission has refused to establish separate units for various groups of non-professional employees. LIUNA Local No.

1306 and City of Port St. Joe, Case No. 8H-RC-753-0053, PERC Order No. 75E-691 (December 23, 1975).

Furthermore, this Commission must be mindful of the problems that confront an employer who must negotiate with numerous bargaining agents. A multiplicity of bargaining units subjects the public employer to the oft times conflicting demands of competing labor organizations. Consequently, the Commission has consistently prohibited fragmentation. See, Federation of Public Employees and City of Oakland Park, Case No. 8H-RC-753-0060, PERC Order No. 76E-1137 (September 13, 1976); Teamsters Local No. 385 and Marion County Road Department, Case No. 8H-RC-752-0220, PERC Order No. 76E-795 (January 28, 1976). Clearly, governmental efficiency and the right of public employees to bargain collectively are most compatible when there are the fewest possible number of units needed for bona fide bargaining.

Therefore, the labor organization's suggestion that the employees of Seminole County be separated into several distinct units must be rejected and the various proposed units expanded so as to comport with those deemed appropriate in past decisions.

Pursuant to the decision in IBF&O, Local No. 5 and Lake County Board of County Commissioners, Case No. 8H-RC-742-0014, PERC Order No. 76E-909 (April 23, 1976) and IBF&O, Local No. 5 and City of West Palm Beach, Case No. 8H-RC-743-0006. PERC Order No. 75E-693 (December 23, 1975), the Commission finds that the bargaining unit should include all blue collar and clerical employees employed by SEMINOLE COUNTY.

The remaining issue to be addressed concerns the proper placement of supervisory employees. In the present case Division Directors, by reason of their authority to assign work and determine the manner in which it is performed, their authority to discipline employees below them and their position as the second level of supervision in county employment are sufficiently "supervisory" in nature so as to be excluded from any "rank and file" unit.

However, supervisors are not per se excluded from coverage of Chapter 447. Florida Statutes (1975). A supervisor, although not defined in the Public Employees Relations Act, is an employee who, while covered by the Act, exercises supervisory powers to such an extent as to no longer share a community of interest with rank- and-file employees. The mere existence of supervisory responsibilities does not require a conclusion that there is present such a conflict as to overcome or outweigh other factors or circumstances giving rise to a community of interest.

Hillsborough County Police Benevolent Association and Florida State Lodge, F.O.P. and City of Tampa, Case Nos. 8H-RC-756-2113, 8H-RC-756-2127. PERC Order No. 76E-967 (May 12, 1976). Moreover,

evidence in the record fails to show that such powers as may in fact be exercised by supervisors require their exclusion from a rank-and-file unit. Accordingly, the Commission finds that supervisors below the level of Division Director, are properly includable in a unit with those rank-and-file employees below them.

In the process of determining the composition of an appropriate bargaining unit the Commission has expanded the unit requested by the Petitioner. Therefore, within ten (10) days from the issuance of this order, the Employer shall file with the Commission, and shall serve upon the other parties to this cause, an alphabetized list containing the names and addresses of all eligible voters. The Commission shall thereupon determine whether the Petition is supported by the requisite showing of interest.

If such showing is deficient, the employee organization shall support its petition with the required showing of interest no later than fifteen (15) days from the date of the Commission's notification of the results of its administrative check. If the employee organization fails to support its petition with the required showing of interest within the fifteen (15) day period, its petition will be dismissed.

ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. Pursuant to Section 447.307(3)(a)(1-3), Florida Statutes (1975) and Fla. Admin. Code Rule 8H-3.25 the Commission ORDERS that an election by secret ballot be held within 45 days of notification of the parties that a sufficient showing of interest exists for the following unit:

INCLUDED: All non-professional regular

full-time and part-time employees of Seminole County.

EXCLUDED: Department Heads, Division Directors, professional employees, managerial/ confidential employees, certified county firefighters, and all other employees of Seminole County.

It is so ordered.

LEONARD A. CARSON CHAIRMAN

77E-60

VOTE - UNIT: For: Chairman Curtis L. Mack

Commissioner M. Kalman Gitomer Against: Commissioner Rosemary W. Filipowicz

(dissenting only as to the inclusion of clerical employees)

VOTE - AFFIRMING HEARING OFFICER' S REPORT:

For: Chairman Curtis L. Mack Commissioner N Kalman Gitomer Commissioner Rosemary W. Filipowicz

Against: None

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on

February 15th 1977, this document was filed in the Office of the

Public Employees Relations Commission at Tallahassee, and a copy served

on each party at its last known address by certified mail.

PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RELATIONS COMMISSION

BY: JUDY W. COLLINS

DEPUTY CLERK TITLE

ENDNOTES

1/ October 28, 1975, the parties were notified that a hearing would be held pursuant to Section 447.307(3), Florida Statutes (1975) and Fla. Admin. Code Rules 8H-3.16 and 8H-8.10. On November 20, 1975, the hearing was conducted by a Hearing Officer from the Division of Administrative Hearings. At the hearing all parties were given the opportunity to appear and present evidence.

2/ On June 7, 1970, the parties were notified that the Commission would hear oral argument on the issues presented by this case pursuant to Section 447.307(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1975) and Fla. Admin. Code Rule 8H-3.25 on June 23, 1976. On that date the Commission met and the parties were given the opportunity to present oral argument. Petitioner failed to enter an appearance.

cc: David Kornreich, Attorney for Employer Thomas J. Pilacek, Attorney for Petitioner

Docket for Case No: 75-000304

Orders for Case No: 75-000304