The city objected to the union’s petition, arguing it was untimely filed under a PELRB rule (Rule 301.01(b)) that says the PELRB must refuse a petition filed so close to the budget submission date that the PELRB cannot conduct the union election within 120 days of that date. On appeal, the city argued that Rule 301.01(b) is an exception to the general rule that permits a petition to be filed “at any time” if the bargaining unit has no certified representative. The PELRB determined that the rule the city relied on only applied when the bargaining unit already has a certified representative. The Court agreed.
RSA 273-A:11, I(b) says that a bargaining unit election must be held not more than 180 or less than 120 days before the budget submission date in the year that the collective bargaining agreement expires. The Court said this provision, known as the “contract bar rule,” deals exclusively with situations where the bargaining unit already has a representative and that there is no analogous provision for when the bargaining unit does not have a certified representative when the petition is filed with the PELRB. The Court said the PELRB rules must be read with the statutory scheme in mind and found that because the bargaining unit had no certified representative when it filed its petition, it could file the petition “any time” under Rule 301.01(a). It also held that Rule 301.01(b) applied only when the bargaining unit already had a certified representative.