Court Opinion

ID: 9650181
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 15:26:27.76108+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:18.750581
License: Public Domain

Coneoed, P. J. A. D.
(temporarily assigned), concurring. I agree with the judgment and all of the opinion of the *53Court except its determination that the withholding of the increments by the Board during negotiations was a violation of that provision of N. J. S. A. 34:13A-5.3 which prohibits unilateral modification by the employer of “existing rules governing working conditions” without negotiation with the union (pp. 48-49).
What the Board did here was to alter compensation, not “working conditions.” Common parlance in labor relations law and practice distinguishes between compensation and working conditions. However they are together comprehended by the term “terms and conditions of employment.” PERC here held that the Board’s altering existing terms and conditions of employment, (using that term in its collective sense) during negotiations for a new contract constituted a failure to negotiate and consequently an unfair labor practice, contrary to N. J. S. A. 34:13A-5.4(a) (1) and (5). It is sufficient for our holding here that we sustain PERC’s action in that respect, without straining to uphold its decision on the added ground of unilateral change in “working conditions,” a concept not here relevant.
Conford, P. J. A. D., concurring in the result.
For reversal — 'Chief Justice Hughes, Justices Sullivan, P ashman, Clifford, Schreiber and Handler and Judge Coneokd — 7.
For affirmance — None.