Current through Register Vol. 56, No. 21, November 4, 2024
Section 19:16-5.14 - Comparability guidelines(a)N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16.g identifies the factors that an interest arbitrator must consider in reviewing the parties' proposals. In addition, in every interest arbitration proceeding, the parties shall introduce evidence regarding the factor set forth in N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16.g(6): the financial impact on the governing unit, its residents, the limitations imposed upon the local unit's property tax levy pursuant to P.L. 2007, c. 62, section 10 (N.J.S.A. 40A:4-45.45), and taxpayers. The arbitrator must indicate which of the factors listed in N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16.g are deemed relevant; satisfactorily explain why the others are not relevant; and provide an analysis of the evidence on each relevant factor. N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16.g(2)(c) lists as a factor "public employment in the same or similar comparable jurisdictions...." Subsection a of section 5 of P.L. 1995, c. 425 requires that the Commission promulgate guidelines for determining the comparability of jurisdictions for the purposes of paragraph (2)(c) of subsection g.(b) The guidelines set forth in (c) and (d) below are intended to assist the parties and the arbitrator in focusing on the types of evidence that may support comparability arguments. The guidelines are intended to be instructive but not exhaustive. The arbitrator shall consider any and all evidence submitted pursuant to the comparability guidelines and shall apply these guidelines in addressing the comparability criterion. 1. The Public Employment Relations Commission recognizes that the extent to which a party to an arbitration proceeding asserts that comparisons to public employment in the same or similar comparable jurisdictions are relevant to that proceeding is a matter to be determined by that party. The Commission also recognizes that it is the responsibility of each party to submit evidence and argument with respect to the weight to be accorded any such evidence.2. The Commission further recognizes that it is the arbitrator's responsibility to consider all the evidence submitted and to determine the weight of any evidence submitted based upon the guidelines in (c) and (d) below and to determine the relevance or lack of relevance of comparability in relationship to all of the factors set forth in N.J.S.A. 34:13A-16.g. Promulgation of these guidelines is not intended to require that any party submit evidence on all or any of the elements set forth in (c) and (d) below or assert that the comparability factor should or should not be deemed relevant or accorded any particular weight in any arbitration proceeding. Nothing in this section shall preclude the arbitrator from supplementing the factual record by issuing subpoenas to require the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents. Nor does anything in this section prevent the arbitrator from requesting the parties to supplement their presentations in connection with this factor or any other factor set forth in the law.(c) The following are comparability considerations within the same jurisdiction: 1. Wages, salaries, hours and conditions of employment of law enforcement officers and firefighters;2. Wages, salaries, hours and conditions of employment of non-uniformed employees in negotiations units;3. Wages, salaries, hours and conditions of employment of employees not in negotiations units;4. History of negotiations: i. Relationships concerning wages, salaries, hours and conditions of employment of employees in police and fire units; andii. History of differentials between uniformed and non-uniformed employees;5. Pattern of salary and benefit changes; and6. Any other considerations deemed relevant by the arbitrator.(d) The following are comparability considerations for similar comparable jurisdictions: 1. Geographic: i. Neighboring or overlapping jurisdictions;ii. Nearby jurisdictions;iv. Nature of employing entity.2. Socio-economic considerations:i. Size, density, and characteristics of population;iii. Average household income;iv. Average property values;v. Gain or loss of assessed value;vi. Ratable increases/decreases from year to year;vii. Tax increases/decreases over last few years;viii. Cost-of-living (locally);ix. Size and composition of police force or fire department;x. Nature of services provided;xiii. Fire incident rate; and3. Financial considerations: i. Revenue: (1) Taxes: (E) State equalization valuation and ratio; and(5) Payments in lieu of taxes;(6) Delinquent tax and lien collections;(8) Federal aid revenues;(9) Sale of acquired property;(11) Other miscellaneous revenues;(12) Prior years surplus appropriated;(14) Reserve for uncollected taxes;(15) Taxes as percentage of total municipal revenues;(16) All other municipal revenues;(17) Any other sources of revenue;(18) Total municipal revenues; and(19) Budget cap considerations;ii. Expenditures: (3) Total municipal functions;(4) Police protection as percentage of total municipal functions;(5) Fire protection as percentage of total municipal functions; and(6) Percentage of net debt/bond rating;iii. Trends in revenues and expenditures;4. Compensation and other conditions of employment: i. Relative rank within jurisdictions asserted to be comparable;ii. Wage and salary settlements of uniformed employees;iii. Wage and salary settlements of non-uniformed employees in negotiations units;iv. Wage and salary settlements of employees not in negotiations units;vi. Overall compensation:(6) Medical and hospitalization benefits;(10) Other retiree benefits;ix. Workload: (1) Number of calls or runs per officer; and(2) Other relevant standards for measuring workload; andx. Other conditions of employment; and5. Any other comparability considerations deemed relevant by the arbitrator.N.J. Admin. Code § 19:16-5.14
Amended by 50 N.J.R. 990(a), effective 3/5/2018