1. What is a bargaining unit?
A bargaining unit is a group of related classifications that share a “community of interest.” Factors include, but are not limited to, the nature and level of the work performed; the education, skills and training required; lines of supervision and personnel practices; and the history of employee representation.
2. What is the process for the creation of a new classification or the revision of an existing classification?
Typically, there is a three-step process involved with creation of a new classification or the revision of an existing classification:
· Develop classification standards
· Seek approval of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) for the placement of the new/revised classifications in the appropriate bargaining unit
· Bargain with the CSU over the impact of the new/revised classifications
3. How were the proposed Library Services Specialist (LSS) classification standards negotiated?
The California State University Employees Union (CSUEU) represents Library Assistants in Unit 7. In 2000, a group of Library Assistants led by Joan Kennedy (Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo) began to compile a comprehensive survey aimed at revising the LA classification to provide upward mobility and the recognition of increased skills.
In 2003, the CSU notified CSUEU of the need to revise Library Assistant classification standards into a broad classification incorporating skill levels. The CSU proposed the combination of the existing Library Assistant I, II, III, and IV and the Lead Library Assistant II, III, and IV into the new classification. The new class would have four skill levels instead of separate classes. CSUEU supported the creation of the new class because we knew that the recognition of increased skills was long overdue.
It was noted that the role of librarians had become more academic, which elevated Library Assistants to a more paraprofessional role. A series of meetings took place between the CSU and CSUEU, resulting in a new set of standards, the Library Services Specialist classification. The proposed new standards included both the Lead and Library Assistants in the same bargaining unit.
4. How many library assistants work in the CSU?
As of March 2008, there are approximately 512 Library Assistants, represented by CSUEU and approximately 23 Lead Library Assistants, represented by the Academic Professionals of California (APC).
5. When were the proposed LSS classification standards finalized?
The LSS classification standards were finalized in July 2003.
6. Where can I find the classification standards for the new LSS series?
http://www.polyunion.org/lib/index.html
7. What happens after an agreement is reached on class standards?
The placement of new/revised classifications in a bargaining unit (“unit modification”) is subject to mutual agreement between unions representing workers in the CSU, CSUEU, and PERB. If employees performing the work specified in the new/revised standards are represented by CSUEU, the approval process is fairly simple. If, however, incumbents are represented by different unions, and no agreement can be reached with respect to unit placement, as was the case with Library Assistants, the parties submit the issue to PERB for resolution.
8. When did CSU seek to place the proposed LSS classification into BU 7?
In February 2004, CSU filed a unit modification petition with PERB seeking to place the newly-created classification Library Services Specialist series into Bargaining Unit 7. CSUEU supported the CSU petition, but APC intervened. The parties were unable to resolve their differences and the matter was set for formal hearing.
9. What did the parties argue at the PERB hearing?
On July 13, 2004, CSUEU and CSU argued that the proposed LSS classification should be placed in BU 7. CSUEU and CSU testified that, due to changes in duties in the work performed in the library, that lead duties had become incidental and impossible to separate out from library assistant duties. They also argued that incumbent LAs should remain in BU 7 and incumbent Lead LAs should be moved into BU 7. APC did not object to or challenge the creation of the proposed LSS classification series, but they argued that the leads should remain in BU 4 and that the LAs should remain in BU 7. They also stated that if PERB supported the notion that all of the classifications belonged in one unit, then they should all be placed in BU 4.
10. What was the outcome of the hearing on the appropriate placement of the LSS classification?
On November 7, 2005, PERB Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Tom Allen granted the University’s petition to eliminate the Library Assistant I, II, III and IV classifications from Unit 7 and the Lead Library Assistant II, III and IV from Unit 4 and replace those classifications with the new Library Services Specialist classification. He also ruled, however, that the new Library Services Specialist (LSS) classification standards should be placed in APC’s Unit 4. Allen concluded that the new LSS standards would be performing work that is similar to the academic support work in Unit 4, rather than the clerical/administrative work in Unit 7.
11. Did CSUEU appeal the decision of the Administrative Law Judge?
Yes. CSUEU appealed Judge Allen’s decision on December 16, 2005. APC filed a response on January 30, 2006. The CSU did not submit a response.
12. What was PERB’s decision?
On January 23, 2007, PERB overturned Judge Tom Allen’s decision to place Library Assistants I, II, III and IV in Bargaining Unit 4. PERB granted CSUEU’s appeal and remanded the case back to ALJ Allen so that additional evidence and testimony could be included in the record.
13. What action did CSUEU and CSU take as a result of PERB’s decision?
As a result of changes in technology, as well as changes in the duties and responsibilities of incumbent Library Assistants, CSU and CSUEU decided that it would be best to place the entire LSS classification into Bargaining Unit 9. CSUEU and CSU agreed that there was a far greater community of interest between LSSs and other classifications in Unit 9 than there was with Unit 4 or Unit 7.
14. What action did APC take as a result of PERB’s decision?
APC decided that it was in the best interest of all concerned parties that the litigation be brought to an end.
15. What action was taken by the ALJ as a result of PERB’s decision?
Judge Allen scheduled a meeting on June 20, 2007, to discuss whether a settlement was possible. He told the parties that if a settlement was not reached, another hearing would be scheduled.
16. What happened at the June 2007 settlement conference?
Pursuant to the terms of the settlement agreement entered into by CSU, APC and CSUEU:
· CSUEU and CSU filed a new Unit Modification Petition which seeks to place the LSS classification in Bargaining Unit 9.
· APC agreed not to contest this Unit Modification Petition.
· CSUEU and CSU requested that PERB hold a hearing on the Unit Modification Petition and issue a decision giving their reasons for the placement of the LSS classification in BU 9.
· Subject to final determination by PERB, incumbent Library Assistants shall be transferred/transitioned/reclassified from BU 7 to the appropriate classification in BU 9.
·