HEARING OFFICER MARY TAVES: On the record, please.

The hearing will be in order. This is a formal hearing in the matter of Avaya Communications Inc., Case 17-UC-239, before the National Labor Relations Board.

The Hearing Officer appearing for the National Labor Relations Board is Mary G. Taves.

All parties have been informed of the procedures at formal hearing before the Board by service of a statement of standard procedures with the notice of hearing. I have additional copies of this statement for distribution if any party wishes more.

Will counsel please state their appearances for the record?

For the Petitioner?

MR. KING: Clarence J. King.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And for the Employer?

MR. NOLAN: Terrence J. Nolan.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Are there any other appearances?

(No response.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Let the record show no response.

I now propose to receive the formal papers. They have been marked for identification as Board's Exhibit 1(a) through 1(d) inclusive, Exhibit 1(d) being an index and description of the entire exhibit.

The exhibit has been shown to all parties. Are there any objections?

(Board Exhibit 1(a) through 1(d) marked for identification.)

MR. KING: None.

MR. NOLAN: None from the Employer.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Hearing no objections, the formal papers are received into evidence.

(Board Exhibit 1(a) through 1(d) received into evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And I would ask, are the parties -- are the names of the parties correct on the Petition? Avaya Communications Inc. and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1614?

MR. NOLAN: Actually, I would like to correct the name of the Employer.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. I'll take a motion to do that. What is the correct name of the Employer, please?

MR. NOLAN: The correct name of the Employer is Avaya Inc., no comma.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. No 'Communications?'

MR. NOLAN: Correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Would you agree to that motion to amend the name of the Employer?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. The name of the Employer is amended to reflect that it is Avaya Inc., no comma between the two.

Now are there any motions to intervene in these proceedings to be submitted to the Hearing Officer at this time?

(No response.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Hearing no response, there are no motions for intervention.

What I would like to do now is have the Employer, if they could, please, give a brief statement of the Employer's business and we hopefully can reach a stipulation on the commerce of the Employer.

Could you tell me what Avaya is, please?

MR. NOLAN: Certainly. Avaya Inc. is a manufacturer and servicer of communications equipment for both enterprise, that is business and government type communications, as well as with respect to the entity at issue here, Connectivity Solutions, what are known as service providers, the phone companies, if you will.

Avaya is a successor to Lucent Technologies, Inc. from which it was spun off, effective October 1st, 2001. Lucent is, in turn, a successor to AT&T Corp., which is a successor to Western Electric which is the Employer in this certification.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: And, yes, the Employer can stipulate that it does reach the minimum threshold for commerce and therefore the Board does have jurisdiction.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Would you so stipulate to the description of the Employer for those purposes? For purposes of jurisdiction?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And is the -- could you please state what facility is at issue here today?

MR. NOLAN: The Avaya facility at issue is the Omaha facility at 12000 I Street, Omaha, Nebraska.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And would the Union agree that that is the facility at issue in the hearing today?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And would the parties stipulate that the Employer conducts at least -- the Employer manufacturers and sells and ships goods valued in excess of $50,000 to points -- from its Omaha facility to points directly outside the State of Oklahoma.

MR. KING: Nebraska?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Nebraska. I don't know why I am in Oklahoma today.

MR. NOLAN: Both states.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. (Laughter.) For Nebraska as well as well as Oklahoma.

MR. NOLAN: And 48 others.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Thank you. And you would stipulate? The Union?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And can we get a stipulation please that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1614 is a labor organization within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act?

MR. NOLAN: So stipulate.

MR. KING: We agree.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Now it is my understanding that the parties have a collective bargaining agreement, is that correct?

MR. NOLAN: Correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And I would like to -- does anyone plan on putting that into the record?

MR. KING: Yes.

MR. NOLAN: Presumably. We might as well call it a joint exhibit.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Yes, maybe we could stipulate that into the record at this time as well as did anyone plan on introducing a copy of the certification?

MR. NOLAN: I believe that is in the contract.

MR. KING: It is on page --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is referenced in the contract?

MR. KING: It is referenced.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And actually I have a copy of the certification. Would the parties agree that this could be entered into the record as Board Exhibit 2?

(Board Exhibit 2 marked for identification.)

MR. KING: Certainly.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Hearing no objection, the copy of the parties' certification of representative being between Local 1614 and Western Electric which was one of the Company's that Mr. Nolan referenced was a predecessor of Avaya, the Board Exhibit 2 would be received.

(Board Exhibit 2 received into evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And then if we could have a copy of the contract entered into the record as Joint Exhibit 1. We only need one copy, is that right?

MR. NOLAN: That is fine. Do you mind parting with that copy?

MR. KING: No, I don't.

MR. NOLAN: No, I mean, we have copies. I don't mean to steal all the copies from you guys but if you --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: You can just give it to the court reporter. Thank you.

MR. KING: Joint 1?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Joint 1.

(Joint Exhibit 1 marked for identification and received in evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Now let me just ask the parties, it is my understanding that on the record -- we have had some off the record discussions about the fact that there are six job classifications in issue in this unit clarification petition and we will go through those in just a moment but what I would like is the parties' position on whether they consider the contract that has been entered into the record as Joint Exhibit 1 to be a bar to this Petition in any way.

Does the Union consider the contract a bar to considering whether these positions should be included in the unit?

MR. KING: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And the Employer?

MR. NOLAN: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And we will have some testimony but it is my understanding and would the parties stipulate that the job classifications in dispute were created at the Omaha facility or came into existence at the Omaha facility after the contract was negotiated and executed?

MR. NOLAN: We can't agree to that.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: We have found at least one, perhaps two, of the titles that do predate the contract.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: All titles postdate the certification but not necessarily the contract.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Then the question arises as to whether the Employer will be contending in this hearing as to whether this contract itself would operate as a bar to inclusion of those positions?

MR. NOLAN: I apologize and I misunderstood your prior question. So, yes, we may raise the contract bar defense on at least one of the titles.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. All right. Is it possible to stipulate that as to the other classifications, the contract is not a bar?

MR. NOLAN: That is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Let's go through and do that then. Which classification does the Employer contend the contract may serve as a bar to inclusion of that classification?

MR. NOLAN: Yes, the titles where we likely will raise the contract bar defense are the purchasing specialist --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: -- and the RFNAV -- that is RF navigator coordinator -- or -- RF navigator coordinator, right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. For purposes of the record, are the parties in agreement that the six job classifications in issue today are: customer service specialists, assistant project managers, blocked invoice coordinators, RFNAV administrators, inventory administrators and purchasing specialists?

Are the parties in agreement that those are the six job classifications in issue today?

MR. NOLAN: Yes, that is correct. And just to clarifying what I previously said, I referred to the RFNAV coordinator position. What I meant to say was the RFNAV administrator position.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Thank you.

MR. NOLAN: And with that we certainly stipulate to that.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And is that the Union's understanding of what we are here today to hear as well, on those six classifications?

MR. KING: With just some -- there is at least one document that refers to associate customer service specialist.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Would we be in agreement that that is the same position that those are interchangeable titles for the customer service specialist or associate customer service specialist, they are the same people in issue?

MR. NOLAN: Actually this is not a title we are familiar with.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So the only -- there is no -- if there is such a title, there is no one in that position? What you call the position is a customer service specialist, is that right?

MR. NOLAN: Customer service specialist, sometimes referred to as a customer service representative.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: But the associate customer service specialist, we are not sure what that is.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Well, we will develop that on the record, if not, but it is my understanding that these are the six job classifications we are going to be talking about today. And now we have -- the Employer may be contending that the purchasing specialist and the RFNAV administrator should not be included in the unit because including those positions in the unit other than them on being included because of the community of interest factors should also not be included because they are barred by the contract.

Now as to the other four positions, it is my understanding and the Employer would stipulate that there is no contention that the contract would bar inclusion in the unit -- the contract itself? Is that -- would you so stipulate?

MR. NOLAN: Yes, those are the four positions.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And you would enter into that stipulation as well?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Now that we have somewhat discussed the six classifications that are in issue, could the parties please give us a brief -- just a brief -- statement on the record as to their position as to the inclusion of the six or the exclusion?

I'll ask the Employer to speak first as to why the six job classifications should not be included in the appropriate unit.

MR. NOLAN: Certainly. Starting with the customer service specialist position, the customer service specialists in Omaha work in what is known as our Customer Care Center which is a separate facility; that is, it is physically separate from the remaining facility. It is connected by a common hallway but it is a separate room.

Those folks came to that work when the position was created approximately two years ago because immediately prior to Lucent spinning off Avaya that work was done in St. Louis, Missouri.

There was a much larger customer service facility and as a result of the spin off of Avaya, a portion of that work needed to be removed from the St. Louis facility and moved somewhere within what was going to be Avaya, the logical place for it being in Omaha because that is where the portion of Avaya known as Connectivity Solutions, which is at issue here, resides.

So the customer service specialists are the same people that were doing this work in St. Louis for years and years and years who are now doing it in Omaha.

Historically they have never been represented by any union and the sort of work they do is dramatically different from the work that the folks in the represented universe do or have done. The most critical -- although certainly not the only distinction -- is their customer interface.

The customer service specialists are just that. They serve the needs of the customer, starting with the product ordering process and taking it through to dealing with the customers' needs in terms of scheduling deliveries, providing technical assistance on Avaya's products, working with the customer to resolve disputes over such things as pricing and delivery.

So they really are a world unto themselves doing work that no one else in the Omaha facility, let alone in the represented universe, is doing. And for those reasons it is Avaya's position that that work is no properly included within the certified unit.

With respect to the -- and just mentally I work this way because it relates to the number of employees. With respect to the purchasing --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: How many employees are in issue for the customer service specialist position?

MR. NOLAN: Seventeen.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Seventeen?

MR. NOLAN: Um-hmm.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Go ahead.

MR. NOLAN: And at the time of the Petition, it is possible that was a larger number. We have had some reductions in that organization. And, of course, you know, because these folks are not nor have they been represented, their terms and conditions are that of other Avaya -- what we call management employees, not to suggest that they are supervisors but in Avaya if you are not represented you are a management employee.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: These folks have been management employees. Historically they are subject to all the same terms and conditions as the other management employees, salary, bonuses, which are discretionary and that sort of thing and, obviously, not subject to the same terms and conditions as the folks in the represented universe who are covered by the contract.

With respect to the purchasing specialist, and here we are dealing with approximately 13 employees in the title of purchasing specialist. As a threshold matter with respect to the contract bar, the position has been in existence for at least 10 years, so it predates the 1998 contract.

These folks really have no place in the unit because not only is the job they do radically different from anything that the unit employees are doing, the skill and qualifications level is leagues above that of the represented folks.

Every single one of these purchasing specialists has a college degree. Most of them have a master's degree. The rest are working towards master's degrees. They all have a professional certification which -- and one of my witnesses will say exactly what it is so I won't take the chance of butchering the name but it is something that is recognized in the purchasing profession as your ticket so to speak akin to the CPA for that accountant.

So these folks are essentially professional people. What do they do? They are charged with procuring all of the raw materials and capital equipment that Avaya uses to make the stuff it makes, such as the structured cabling and the communications hardware that it makes.

These are the people that go out and literally buy the copper, the steel, the tin. They buy it in large quantities. They are working $20-$30-million deals. They have direct interface with Avaya's vendors. Their positions bring them sometimes throughout the world because they support not only purchasing for the Omaha facility but purchasing for Connectivity's facilities elsewhere in the world.

So they travel a good bit. They are sort of working on their own inasmuch as they have access via the laptop to the office from wherever they are and unlike the represented folks they don't need to be there a specific shift or schedule.

So they are doing -- they are serving a very important professional function for Avaya. Further underscoring that, they are constantly dealing with Avaya's lawyers in New Jersey to negotiate contracts. These are the people that go out with, you know, the XYZ copper company and sign on the bottom line for multi-million-dollar deals.

If you compare that some of the 'purchasing' that some of the represented folks have done over the years and perhaps are even doing now, the sort of purchasing they do is what we refer to as non-discretionary purchasing. They buy smaller ticket items where they have very little discretion in where to get it from, what to pay for it, those sorts of things. And in no event do they get involved in the procurement of raw materials or capital equipment for the facility.

So you will likely hear some testimony that some of the represented folks have done some purchasing on behalf of Avaya but it is not the sort of big ticket discretionary purchasing that the purchasing specialists do. And I think you will also be satisfied that there is a good bit of evidence that to the extent represented folks are doing any purchasing they don't have the qualifications or the skill levels that the purchasing specialists do.

So that is pretty much our position with respect to the purchasing specialists.

Moving down the line -- and, again, just going in order of number of employees potentially affected -- that brings us to the inventory administrators of which there are currently six employees in that position.

The inventory administrator position was created within the last two years part and parcel with the implementation company wide of a system known as SAP which is a front -- it is an across-the-board software package that monitors and controls Avaya's production processes from start to finish, ordering, inventory, actual production, delivery. It is all controlled by SAP.

SAP started to cause us to realize that there were a lot of problems with the system inasmuch as vendors may not have been getting paid on time because orders were coming in, you know, disarray, data was being entered incorrectly into SAP.

When you implement such a massive software package inevitably there will be glitches, there will be problems. Well, that wasn't making our vendors happy so we had some folks -- some of whom started working for Avaya on a contract basis -- who came in.

They are essentially SAP gurus, if you will, and they are the ones who can troubleshoot SAP problems and the correlating what are called blocked invoices. If an invoice can't get through the system, it is known as a blocked invoice. These are the folks that troubleshoot that stuff along the way.

Now they are all highly skilled people, high degree of computer literacy, very well versed in the SAP system which these days has become pretty much an industry standard within the manufacturing industry for system administration.

These people are all very well versed in SAP. They are all college educated folks and they are essentially professionals as well.

There are some represented folks who from time to time do what you are going to hear referred to as blocked invoice work. There are some represented folks who may at the direction of an inventory administrator somehow remedy a situation which will allow a vendor to get paid. But it is more of a clerical nature and, in fact, it is done at the direction of the inventory administrator.

And further, the -- the represented folks that get involved in this process, they can only take it to a point and then where they stop, the inventory administrator picks up.

The inventory administrator coordinates a lot of the activities that some of the represented people are engaged in. None of them have direct supervisory responsibility but they are coordinating represented folks.

They also train both the represented folks as well as other employees at the facility in the implementation and use of SAP as well as preventive measures to insure that we don't get these number of blockages and to insure that these things aren't happening on an ongoing basis.

That is really what we are looking at in terms of the inventory administrators. And I just wanted to check with a note and make sure I have fully covered that because something is nagging me. If you would indulge me for a moment.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Sure.

MR. NOLAN: Yes, I feel I am straying into another title, the blocked invoice coordinator, which I will remedy that but let me just make sure that I have given the inventory administrators position its due.

Okay. I have been referring to the term of blocked invoices, the sort of problems that the inventory administrators are dealing with. They are more inventory discrepancies. There is, you know, the amount of stuff that is supposed to be there and vice versa; also a system-driven situation which the inventory administrators are trained to resolve.

So again in some a considerably higher level position both in terms skill and responsibility than the tiered employees that do this sort of work. And, also, I should add that the inventory administrators are supervised by someone who solely supervises the inventory administrators, does not supervise also represented employees and that is also the case for the prior two titles which I failed to mention.

Moving on to the remaining three titles each of which potentially affects one employee, we have the title of assistant project manager. The assistant project manager is -- to understand that position you have to understand what is project management. It is the entire process by which a product is made.

Here is what Avaya makes. Here is how it gets made. When Avaya decides to roll out a project, the assistant project manager is the person that coordinates the implementation of that project into the production process, monitoring it every step of the way.

In so doing, they are also coordinating represented employees. They are working with represented employees, delegating tasks to them routinely. They do not have actual supervisory responsibility but they are routinely delegating to those folks and taking them through the process, again, to get the product from its inception phase to its production phase.

They are a critical part of the process. Interestingly but for some budgetary constraints and otherwise corporate inertia, the assistant project manager would be a supervisor but the organization hasn't had the opportunity to fully flesh that out as to how that would work.

But certainly the incumbent is more than capable of supervisory responsibility and can handle that aspect of the job if it is ever grown to include supervisory responsibility.

Like the other positions, the assistant project manager obviously is a management employee without -- with terms and conditions set as they are for all other Avaya management employees and not pursuant to the Union contract.

The blocked invoice coordinator -- and I did start talking about that somewhat before when I was referring to the inventory administrator, that job focuses more specifically on this issue of blocked invoices and Avaya was having a situation where these invoices were getting blocked, vendors were not getting paid. We decided to create this position.

And, in fact, the witness you are going to hear from is the person who created the position, and did so because she considered whether the tiered employees that were involved in that process -- and when I say tiered, by the way, I am referring to the represented employees -- whether the represented employees involved in that process were effectively remedying the situation and she concluded that they weren't so she created this position which allows a management employee to coordinate the efforts of represented people to deal with these blocked invoices.

And, again, that has been a successful endeavor. Inherent in that position is also a very high level of understanding, not just of the SAP system but of the entire infrastructure of the plant and the facility, you know, how invoices are ordered, how -- or rather how products are ordered, how invoices are paid, vendor relationships, all those sort of more professional type functions that the represented employees whom the blocked invoice coordinator coordinates do not handle.

And with that, of course, are the necessary additional professional qualifications that the blocked invoice coordinator has which the represented employees that assist in that process do not have.

I think we -- that leaves one title which I would like to briefly state our position on and that is the RF navigator administrator and, quite frankly, I don't think we need to even belabor what that person does substantively because they are supervisors and they have -- I think the exact number is nine -- perhaps ten -- I think nine employees that they actually supervise.

And they manifest all the indicia of supervisory status. They are involved in the scheduling of their work. They are involved in the discipline process. They are involved in adjusting discipline or other union issues at the first step of the grievance process. They can recommend termination which will likely be acted upon, if necessary. They can assign overtime.

Pretty much any supervisory responsibility that we are allowed the Union contract, the person in that position has. So our position is very easy on that one in that they are supervisors.

With all due respect to some of my witnesses who I am sure cringed at my informal discussion of what some of their people do, that is where we coming from in terms of why these positions are not properly included in the unit.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So the Employer's contention is that one of these individuals is a supervisor. You used the term manager quite loosely. Are you contending that under the -- that those individuals that you called -- or talked about as managers such as the blocked invoice coordinator or the inventory administrators are managers within the meaning of the Act where they effectuate and formulate policies on behalf of management?

You are not contending they are managerial employees? That is just -- am I right or wrong?

MR. NOLAN: That is correct. I mean --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: We don't -- we don't view any of these positions as management positions under the Act.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: We view one of them as a supervisor.

The term management employees at Avaya is our generic term for all non-represented employees.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right.

MR. NOLAN: So you will hear witnesses refer to some of their people as management employees. That simply means they are non-represented.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Right. And the sole thrust of the Employer's argument as to all but the RFNAV administrator will be that they do not share a sufficient community of interest with the represented employees to justify their inclusion in the unit?

MR. NOLAN: That is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Okay. I just wanted to make that clear.

MR. NOLAN: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Would the Union please tell me what their position is in regards to the inclusion of the six classifications in dispute.

MR. KING: Sure. As defined by Board Exhibit 2, the Union is recognized to include all salaried employees at the facility. I don't believe that is in dispute.

And the customer service specialists, while we talk about being separate from the facility, I believe we are talking the production floor versus the actual location of the facility which is rather extensive actually.

There was some discussion on where these people previously -- and I am sorry if I am going into some sort of rebuttal but I am going from a --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: That is fine.

MR. KING: -- previous discussion -- discussion of where the work has been performed historically prior to the spin off of Avaya from Lucent and I believe our testimony will show that while some of the work may have come directly from St. Louis, the work has been performed at other facilities throughout the country by the Employer and that it is in some of the facilities represented positions.

The list of job duties that are performed at this time have been performed in the past and continue to be performed at this time by our workers, presently classified under the unit.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And what position under the collective bargaining agreement would correspond to the customer service representatives?

MR. KING: The job titles would be material management analyst and senior material management analyst for all those. And, in fact, I get picked on on these. There are a lot of different titles used. Material management analyst is also Tier 4 which was referred to in the past. I believe that Tier 4 refers to the pay rating.

Material management analyst is a broad description of the job and then underneath that I believe there are some more defined descriptions. Planner is one term that is used regularly but under the broad terms in the collective bargaining agreement under the job descriptions you will see the occupational code of material management analyst and senior material management analyst.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And these are job classifications that are set forth at Appendix A-8 --

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- as the occupational job classifications? Those are the unit represented job classifications on page 29 of the contract?

MR. KING: Yes. They are listed on page 29 and they continue on with job descriptions on page B, I believe.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Okay.

MR. NOLAN: Just to clarify, I believe you referred to Appendix. It is actually Article 8 that we are talking about.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Article 8, Appendix 8-A?

MR. NOLAN: Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Page 29 of the collective bargaining agreement.

MR. NOLAN: Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Go ahead. I'm sorry for interrupting. I just want the reader of the record to know where the job -- the unit descriptions are.

MR. KING: And the occupational job classification that is the term that is used in the collective bargaining agreement of material management analyst and senior material management analyst will apply for all positions that are in question.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. KING: If you move on to the purchasing specialists, the contention it has been in existence for greater than ten years is one that I have just heard today so rather than respond to that, the postings that were made during the term of the contract, in our eyes, in the Union's eyes, created a position that was different than what had existed or we were aware existed in the past.

They did -- there are many terms of the posting that -- of the management postings that were very similar and include work that was done and continues to be done in this situation under the bargaining unit.

There is some discussion on the levels of expenditures that these individuals are allowed to do and there are set terms on that. However, we believe that the job as posted was paramount to that, the senior material management analyst.

Inventory administrator, on this, as was properly stated, was created in the last two years as a result of SAP, a term I am not exactly sure of the acronym, but involves a computer software package, I believe, that came in to ID a lot of problems. Well, it ID'd problems in some cases and some cases created some of these problems but a lot of these problems existed in the past.

And you will hear testimony that vendors not getting paid had occurred prior to two years ago and it was resolved by tiered employees in the past and continues to be resolved by tiered employees.

The work that is being done by these individuals, while we are not casting aspersions as to their computer literacy, is work that is done by the tiered employees and doesn’t require a coding or anything of that kind in support of the SAP software. So, again, they fall under the material management analyst and senior material management analyst.

I'll deal with the two together, blocked invoice coordinator and assistant project manager. It appears what they have done is taken one of our positions and tried to -- let me rephrase that.

Prior these two positions were historically -- the blocked invoice coordinator's work was done day to day -- there are many blocked invoices that come up -- I'll get their as the numbers that occur on regular shift -- and they are handled that way. This appears to be a position that is used to expedite certain invoices, however, it is no different than what is done with the rest of the individual problems that occur.

The assistant project manager does provide assistance to the product line -- or the project manager. That has been done in the past and you will hear testimony again that these situations existed in the past, that this job was recently created and it usurped some the responsibilities from those positions into a management-type position.

The last thing, on the RFNAV position, again, on the supervisory -- as a result of discussions this morning -- I have talked to Cory and she says it has evolved into a supervisory position but upon its creation it stood as the others were. There was a lot of overlapping and it appeared to be pulling of work from the bargaining unit into a management position.

We will discuss -- continue to discuss the supervisory level appropriate and make changes to our --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: If you do believe -- I mean, for purposes of saving time, I would say that if you do believe that it has supervisory indicia, and we are going to resolve that issue, you know, try to resolve it and just stipulating that that position is excluded from the unit would probably be the way to go if you do truly believe that the person now possesses supervisory authority. Because if it is that clear that you think it is probably true, then that is the finding we would make as well.

All right. Just for my edification, it appears that these positions, these unit positions -- I am looking down through these job classifications and I am just having a little bit of trouble and I am sure somebody is going to testify. This is not a production and maintenance unit? Am I right in my --

MR. NOLAN: Correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- belief? And this -- is this like production support type people or how would you classify these people?

MR. NOLAN: That is, I think an accurate characterization.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. You have more professional type people but just represented?

MR. NOLAN: Actually the majority of the unit is clerical.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Is it more of a clerical type unit?

MR. KING: Yes.

MR. NOLAN: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: Casually we refer to it as many different types of units. Casually we will either refer to them as a clerical unit and sometimes we even refer to them as salaried employees which is merely a contrast to the production and maintenance unit which we refer to as the hourly employees.

They are still non-exempt employees; it is just that they get paid a weekly salary so it -- you know, it is --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Okay.

MR. NOLAN: Different terminology.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I was reading through these job classifications and oftentimes you can't tell what someone does by reading through a job classification.

All right. Let's go off the record for a second.

(Off the record.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: On the record.

In off-the-record discussions, we have decided that it would be best for the Employer to begin with the presentation of evidence. Mr. Nolan, would you call your first witness?

MR. NOLAN: Please. The Employer calls Mr. Stan Mason.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: You have a long walk up here, Mr. Mason, and your chair is right up here.

Off the record.

(Off the record.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: On the record.

In off the record discussions, before Mr. Mason begins his testimony, the parties have reached a stipulation concerning the unit classifications.

The parties would agree that the unit classifications, the names of the job classifications included in the unit would be contained in Article 8, Appendix 8-A on page 29 of their collective bargaining agreement and that the number of employees in unit classifications contained in Appendix 8-A is approximately 146.

And that the number of employees in the material management analyst and senior material management analyst positions that the Union believes would most closely approximate those who are in the disputed classifications are approximately 43 to 45.

Would the parties so stipulate?

MR. NOLAN: I think it might actually be a little more than that. I mean, if you want to call it 50 -- approximately 50.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Approximately 50?

MR. KING: That is all right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. The stipulation is received.

Mr. Mason, would you raise your right hand, please?

Whereupon,

STAN MASON,

having first been duly sworn, was called as a witness and examined and testified as follows:

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Thank you.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Good morning, Stan.

A Good morning.

Q Stan, who do you work for?

A I work for Avaya Inc.

Q And what is your position with Avaya?

A I am a senior manager in the Global Procurement Organization.

Q And who do you work for?

A I work for a gentleman, Bill Onibudo.

Q For the transcriber's benefit --

A O-n-i-b-u-d-o.

Q Okay. Stan, I would like to show you what I have marked for identification purposes as E-1 and E-2, Employer's Exhibits 1 and 2. And I'll hand this to the Hearing Officer so she can follow along.

(Employer Exhibits 1 and 2 marked for identification.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Thank you.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: All right. What is the document that has been marked as Employer's Exhibit 1, do you see that, Stan?

A Yes, I do.

Q Do you recognize that document?

A I do.

Q Why don't you tell us what that is?

A It is an organization chart, essentially senior manager and above, for the Connectivity Solutions business.

Q Okay. Let's -- let's -- now just so it is clear on the record, why don't you look at the one we have marked as Employer's Exhibit No. 2?

A It is an organization chart for the Global Purchasing Organization for Avaya.

Q Okay. And before you refers to Bill Onibudo and then I see you. Could you just tell us how these two org charts fit together because I am not sure if I see -- yes, I do. Yes, I do see Bill.

A The E-1 chart shows Bill Onibudo reporting to Connie Schmidt. However, she has since retired.

Q Okay.

A And so Bill today reports directly to Steve Clark.

Q Okay.

A And Steve is the group vice president.

Q And so he heads up Connectivity Solutions?

A He heads up Connectivity Solutions.

Q And it is not shown on here but do you know who Steve reports to?

A Yes, I do.

Q Who is that?

A He reports directly to Don Peterson.

Q Okay.

A Who is CEO of Avaya.

Q Okay. Now I am going to keep them on hold. I may refer back to them. Let's take you for a little of your history with Avaya. How long have you been with Avaya or -- and when I refer to Avaya, I am talking about Avaya and all its many predecessors?

A A little over 40 years. I completed 40 years of service last fall.

Q And how much of your 40 years have your spent in the purchasing organization?

A Almost 24 years of that time in purchasing.

Q Okay. Forty years at the Company probably puts you in a pretty good position to tell us what it does. Why don't you for the purposes of the record just give us a little explanation of what Avaya does?

A Okay. First of all, Avaya is a relatively new company, about a year-and-a-half old. It was created as a result of the spin off from Lucent.

Avaya consists of two main businesses: the BCS business, which is the Business Communications Services business, and Connectivity Solutions, which encompasses the Omaha facility.

Within the Omaha facility -- within the Omaha facility, we have three business units. They are referred to as ExchangeMAX, Systimax and ICS which is Integrated Cabinet Solutions.

Q And when you say the first two, Systimax and the other one --

A Systimax and ExchangeMAX.

Q ExchangeMAX. What are they?

A ExchangeMAX is primarily a product line that goes into a central office where phone -- calls -- lines go into the feedback out to other subscribers and Systimax is more the consumer type of product. You might relate to it as the wiring, the inside wiring and the outlets and so on that would go into a hospital or maybe a building like this.

Q For a phone system?

A For a phone system. For more than a phone system, though. For a communication system.

Q That includes that working equipment and whatnot? And those are the products that you guys manufacture -- that Connectivity Solutions manufactures, correct?

A That is correct.

Q And some of that work -- well, how much of that manufacturing is done in Omaha? How much of Connectivity Solutions manufacturing?

A There is actually five manufacturing facilities. Omaha is one. It is the largest. But we also have four facilities offshore. We have one in Ireland, one in China, one in Venezuela and one in Australia. But those are relatively small. The majority of it is manufactured in Omaha.

Q Okay. Let's now focus a little more narrowly on your organization, the -- the GPO. What is GPO's role within Connectivity Solutions?

A GPO is charged with actually securing all of the materials that are required to run that business. So that is materials and services. So that includes the material that is required to actually build product. It includes the capital equipment. It also includes the all of the services that are required from time to time.

Q Could you give some examples of the raw materials that Connectivity Solutions uses to produce its products?

A Sure. Raw materials would include such things as copper, copper rod which is drawn down to make wire, the insulating materials which would be various types of insulating, jacket compounds. And that would be in the electronic wire and cable shops.

On the other side of the business -- in the apparatus side of the business, we would use basic materials such as injection molding compound, aluminum, steel, brass, those types of things would be the raw materials.

Q And how about some examples of capital equipment that GPO would procure on behalf of Connectivity Solutions?

A Really a wide range would apply to that category. It would be anything that the Company would capitalize. It could be molding presses, extruding lines, punch presses.

Q Okay. Are you familiar with a title known within the GPO as purchasing specialist?

A Yes, I am.

Q And just for clarity's sake, because we may hear the term referred to during the hearing today, do we sometimes refer to purchasing specialists informally as buyers?

A Yes, quite often.

Q So to you those terms are synonymous?

A Yes.

MR. NOLAN: Okay. By the way, it is probably a good time to move for the admission of Employer's Exhibits 1 and 2.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Any objection?

MR. KING: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: They are received.

(Employer Exhibits 1 and 2 received into evidence.)

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Stan, could you take a look at this document? Are you familiar with this document?

A Yes, I am.

Q What is it?

(Employer Exhibit 3 marked for identification.)

A It is the generic job description for one of our buyers, for one of our purchasing specialists. It is, again, the generic that covers all of the purchasing specialists in the organization.

Q Okay. Using the exhibit we marked as E-3 as sort of your road map, why don't you explain perhaps in a little greater level of detail exactly what the purchasing specialist does?

A I will be glad to. Purchasing buyer, purchasing specialist is a professional buying assignment. The person in that position responsible for managing the spend that they are assigned in the associated area of responsibility, plus the supply base.

That individual is responsible to negotiate all of the contracts covering that spend, required to evaluate suppliers; would occasionally visit suppliers' sites, would monitor that suppliers' performance, quality, and delivery performance; would also probably do some kind of an analysis when business was awarded; would interface with engineering lab people, other support people, corporate legal, as an example, corporate treasury for credit review and approval.

Q Let's focus on a couple of those items. You talked about interfacing with the vendors. Typically what level personnel from one of our vendors would the purchasing specialists interface with?

A Probably depends on the size of the company. If they were smaller companies, it would certainly be the CEO's, the presidents, the owners. If you get into a larger company, it could be some kind of a sales -- somebody that was responsible for an account, like an account manager.

Q Now I think you alluded to some sort of pricing analysis responsibility that these folks have, is that correct?

A Yes.

Q Why don't you explain how that works?

A On a large purchase, the buyer would be required to secure a quotation which would be made up of a variety of specifications and so on. Once the quotations -- very often it would be competitive quotations. When the quotations were returned, they would do a TCO, which is a total cost of ownership analysis that would place a value on various attributes, price being one, quality, service, what is at risk by doing business with that supplier, etc., and make a source selection decision based on that TCO.

Q Okay. You also I think alluded to their involvement in sort of the technical aspect of the production process. Is that, in fact, the case?

A It is.

Q Can you explain how that works?

A Sure. They deal with specifications with engineers. Oftentimes we would say we are joined at the hip with the engineer to collaborate on a source selection, to also decide what the proper description of an item may be and purchase may be, and then actually taking a look at the specifications and the drawings that would be required that would go out to the supplier and be returned which is what they would base their pricing and quote on.

Q You also alluded to their responsibility for negotiating contracts. I would like to follow up on that on a little. First of all, do they have any level of authority with respect to actually signing contracts on behalf of Avaya?

A Each buyer has a purchase responsibility, a spend responsibility, ranging from I'll say roughly $20 million maybe up to $50 million. And when they actually do a contract, the purchasing specialist has to submit a contract through an approval process. The authority of a purchasing specialist was changed once we became Avaya and it is now $100,000. It was $400,000 prior to that.

Q So what you are saying then is -- just so we have it clear for the record -- currently a purchasing specialist can enter a contract on behalf of Avaya for up to $100,000 with -- of their own approval?

A Of their own approval with no intervention from anybody else.

Q And beyond that, they have to escalate up the management chain?

A Right. Purchasing manager is the next level up. It has $1 million. My level is currently $2 million.

Q Okay. In addition to negotiating contracts, once a contract is in place, do they have any role in the management of the vendor contract?

A The buyer typically conducts a review with the supplier on maybe a quarterly to semi-annual basis and you take a look at all the attributes of the contract and primarily focusing on delivery performance and price.

The buyers are all charged with achieving price reductions and typically a $1-to-$5 million goal is normal for each buyer.

Q Now with respect to the items they are procuring, whether it be raw materials or capital equipment, how much discretion do they have with respect to sourcing, that is where they can go to buy this stuff?

A The buyer has a lot of discretion on the sourcing. Again, as I mentioned, he does collaborate with engineering but the buyer has the ability to seek out and is required to seek out and add sources, maybe in addition to what the engineer specified.

And at the conclusion of the TCO, there would be some kind of a joint review and so on and they would agree that this was an appropriate source.

Q Okay. You also --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Excuse me. What is TCO?

THE WITNESS: Total cost of ownership analysis.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Thank you.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: You alluded to interaction with the Avaya legal staff. Could you further describe that process?

Q So it sounds like John is the Avaya lawyer that supports the your purchasing process?

A Yes. That is correct.

Q And in that respect, the buyers are interacting with him?

A Yes.

Q Okay. You mentioned that these folks -- that is the purchasing specialists -- travel. Is their travel limited to -- is it just domestic or is it domestic and/or international?

A It really depends on the need and the buyer really has to be available to travel on whatever his area of responsibility is. Current economic times have dictated that we don't travel much but in the past we have had buyers in Asia and also in Central America.

Q And why is that they are traveling worldwide? Is it -- well, you tell me. Why is they are traveling worldwide and not just domestically?

A Well, the Global Purchasing Organization, the structure that is on the organization chart --

Q And just so we are clear, you are now referring to what we marked as --

A E-2.

Q -- Employer's Exhibit 2. Okay.

A They also have responsibility for collaborating with those businesses to secure materials. In fact, the individual in Ireland actually reports in to -- not on this chart but in to Bill.

Q Okay. So is it fair to say the purchasing specialists support Connectivity's purchasing worldwide?

A Yes, it is.

Q They are not just supporting Omaha?

A That is correct.

Q Now the purchasing specialists, they have -- the do have offices in Omaha, right?

A Yes, they do.

Q Is it possible for them to do their work from elsewhere, though?

A Certainly. All the buyers, all the purchasing specialists have laptops. They have laptops so that they can take them on the road with them when they travel and also they could work out of the office. They could do a virtual office at home or wherever.

Q And has Connectivity Solutions' purchasing function always been done at Omaha?

A A portion of it has always been done at Omaha but a piece that we call basic materials which were the high valued -- what we would call commodities which are the copper and the plastics, steel, aluminum and so on, at one time they were done on a centralized basis when there were more units than Omaha buying those and they were done in Greensboro, North Carolina. They transferred to Omaha roughly say five years ago.

Q So a portion of the work that the purchasing specialists are now doing was previously done in Greensboro?

A That is correct. That served -- Greensboro served as a headquarters for a variety of organizations, legal, HR, purchasing.

Q Let's focus a little now on the qualifications that your purchasing specialists possess. What are the minimum qualifications necessary for the position?

A You have to have a bachelor's degree. In fact, we encourage all of the buying staff to secure a master's degree.

And so today all of them have bachelor's degrees. We do have about 80 percent of the folks that are either securing a masters or in process someplace.

Q Okay. Any other professional qualifications?

A All of the -- all of the buying staff belong to, are members of a professional organization. That is the NAPM, National Association of Purchasing Management. Three individuals in our group, in fact, hold positions on the NAPM board.

There is a professional certification, CPM, certified purchasing manager, that is bestowed by the NAPM, and we ask that all of our buying staff procure CPM certification.

They are today in various stages of that but, again, I would say probably 75 to 85 percent are either certified or are near certification.

Q Okay. And to help you with these questions, I am going to hand you two documents which are the only copies I have. Stan, I am showing you copies of two of -- two different copies of what we have previously marked and is now in evidence as Employer's Exhibit No. 2 and I notice there is a bunch of color codes there.

Did you put those color codings there?

A I did.

Q Okay. Using those as guides, I am going to now ask you specifically, first on that one, would you just list the employees that are coded as -- well, let's do it this way. What do those codes represent?

A Well, the pink code represents the A-4's which is the title purchasing specialists. And there is actually one supervisor that I have got coded in there, probably incorrectly.

So I don't know if you want to count on there. There's one, two, three, four --

Q Let's focus on -- that more identifies the position. Let's focus on the yellow and purple.

A Okay. So the yellow code is all those individuals that have a bachelor's degree and that is all of what I would call the buying staff, the management staff, except one person.

Q Okay.

A And the purple is the folks that have MBA's or MBA's in process and of the management staff -- again, I didn't calculate a percentage but it is probably 75 to 85 percent.

Q Okay. And so would it be fair to say then -- because I am looking here and I can show it to anyone who wants to look at it -- it looks to me like all the purchasing specialists have a full yellow line. Does that suggest that all purchasing specialists have at least a bachelor's degree?

A That is correct.

Q Okay. It also looks like one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine of the -- nine of the fourteen have either MBA's or are working towards an MBA?

A That is correct.

Q Okay. And then looking again at this one that you also marked up, it looks like here -- what does the purple represent?

A Purple represents certification. They are either already certified by the NAPM or a certification is in process and they have passed -- there is a series of modules you have to pass and they have passed at least one or two of those modules.

Q Okay. And --

A So they are on their way to becoming certified.

Q And looking at your -- at your little schematic here, it appears that one, two, three, four, five, six of the purchasing specialists have completed the professional certification, is that accurate?

A That is right.

Q And it looks like an additional one, two, three --

A Four, five --

Q Five --

A -- are in process.

Q -- are in process, is that correct?

A That is correct.

MR. NOLAN: Okay. Should we put these in the record or --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I would like to see it just so I have it.

MR. NOLAN: No problem. It is actually rather useful and if you think they should be in the record, we would be more than happy to offer them.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: What is GPO? I'm sorry?

THE WITNESS: Global Procurement Organization.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Thank you. Can I ask him a question about --

MR. NOLAN: Please do.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. I think we might as well put this in.

MR. NOLAN: Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Let's call it Employer's Exhibit 4 and 5 --

MR. NOLAN: Or 3(a) and (b) -- yeah, 4 and 5.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Employer's 4 and 5. I am going to make the one -- the educational one Employer 4 and Employer 5 is going to be the certification one.

(Employer Exhibits 4 and 5 marked for identification.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Now you say -- just for purposes of the record -- the employees -- the actual purchasing specialists are the employees that are --

THE WITNESS: Are pink.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- that have the pink?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: On Employer's Exhibit 4. Okay. But Mr. Carlos Palacios is also a purchasing specialist, correct?

THE WITNESS: He is not. His title is senior purchasing specialist so I did not -- he is a grade or a level above the other individuals so didn't mark him as a purchasing specialist. It is a separate title.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Is that person -- is the Union contending that that person also should be included in the unit, this Carlos Palacios who is a senior purchasing specialist?

MR. KING: I'm sorry. I --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I'm sorry. It is hard without having the document.

THE WITNESS: I actually have two individuals that are that way: Joe Zaborowski is also a senior purchasing specialist. And he is --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Is he on there?

THE WITNESS: He is. He should be over on the right-hand side.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. I see him. He is called a senior specialist?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: NPI IPL?

THE WITNESS: That is --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So Mr. Carlos Palacios and Joe Zaborowski --

THE WITNESS: Zaborowski.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- are senior purchasing specialists. Is the Union contending that those people also should be included in the unit?

MR. KING: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So can we stipulate that Joe Zaborowski and Carlos Palacios are appropriately excluded from the unit as -- are they supervisors?

THE WITNESS: No, they are just a level higher than the purchasing specialists.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

THE WITNESS: And it is because of the type of work they do.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: There is also -- that is one that I thought that might be useful for.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: The A-4's, we believe at least, are the specific individuals that the Union is seeking. All of them are purchasing specialists except for one --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: In pink on E-4 and E-5?

MR. NOLAN: On both, correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right.

THE WITNESS: On both.

MR. NOLAN: All those individuals are purchasing specialists except for one -- Karen Anderson?

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

MR. NOLAN: Anderson. She is not a purchasing specialist but she is a supervisor.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: So we are not sure if the Union is seeking her in the --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Well, let's get this cleared up. All right.

THE WITNESS: She is a purchasing supervisor and not a 'buyer.'

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So let's reach a stipulation that Carlos Palacios, Joe Zaborowski are not being sought by the Union and should not be included in any unit found appropriate as they don't share sufficient community of interest with unit employees, is that --

MR. KING: We would stipulate.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: The Union would agree to that stipulation?

MR. KING: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And the Employer would agree to that stipulation? They will be excluded from any unit found appropriate?

MR. NOLAN: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Karen Anderson who is in the middle of the document classified as a specialist, the Union -- what is the Union's position as to her?

MR. KING: No on Karen.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So as to Karen Anderson who is classified as a specialist of systems, she will be excluded from the unit as a --

MR. NOLAN: Well, we view her as a supervisor.

THE WITNESS: She is a supervisor.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Would the Union agree that Ms. Anderson should be excluded from any unit as a supervisor?

MR. KING: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. That stipulation is received.

And the Union is also not seeking Sandra Schropp or Gay Davis, is that correct?

MR. KING: They are already -- those are represented positions.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Those are represented -- those are people who are included in the unit. Okay. So just for purposes of the record, I am going to go through and name the individuals who are purchasing specialists who the Union contends should be in the unit and who the Employer contends should not be in the unit.

MR. NOLAN: Great.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Those are Nathan Bills, Michael Edwards, Thelma Eley, Brad Hilton, Crystal Stewart, Greg Jenkins, Travis Hofeldt, Eric Southard, Robert Mantell, Josh Fiedler, Nicole Schnieders and Bethany Hahn, is that correct?

MR. NOLAN: That is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Is there any objection to the introduction of Employer's Exhibit 4 or Employer's Exhibit 5?

MR. KING: I would just like to see it quickly. I didn't get to --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Sure. Sure.

MR. KING: I don't know if Exhibit 3 is offered yet.

MR. NOLAN: No, and I might as well do that now. Offer Exhibit 3 --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Any objection?

MR. KING: No.

MR. NOLAN: -- 4 and 5.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is received.

(Employer Exhibit 3 received into evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Any objection?

MR. KING: No objection.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. They are received. You can give them to the court reporter. Thank you.

(Employer Exhibits 4 and 5 received into evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: You can go ahead. Thank you.

MR. NOLAN: Okay.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Stan, actually it probably easier again to use the -- we will use Employer's Exhibit 4 -- either one. Could you just go through the employees that we now know for sure that the Union is seeking and explain for us where those individuals came from, that is, how they got into current positions?

A Sure. Let me start with, on the left side, with Nathan Bills. Nathan transferred to GPO from one of the operating business units. He was the supervisor in our electronic wire and cable factory so he lateralled into purchasing.

Michael Edwards, we hired off the street. New hire.

Thelma Eley, the same as Nathan, transferred in from our electronic wire and cable facility where she was a supervisor.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: From Omaha?

THE WITNESS: From Omaha. Both of those --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Thank you.

THE WITNESS: -- are from Omaha.

Brad Hilton was a new hire.

Crystal Stewart was a new hire. Greg Jenkins was a new hire. Travis Hofeldt was a new hire. Eric Southard was a new hire. Robert Mantell was a new hire. Josh Fiedler was a new hire. Nicole Schnieders was a new hire.

Bethany Hahn actually came to us from the IPL, the interconnect product line operating unit where she was the supervisor. She transferred laterally into us.

Q Okay. How long have we had purchasing specialists in the GPO?

A As a function, forever. As a title, for probably -- I think that title was created by AT&T roughly 15 plus years ago. And one time they were called assistant buyers. At one time they were called buyers, so by different names, same function.

Q Okay. And this is a bit redundant but based upon your prior answer with respect to where everyone came from, I take it then that none of the purchasing specialists came into their current positions directly from the bargaining unit that is at issue here, what we call the tiered universe?

A That is correct. None of them did.

Q Have any -- as far as you know, have any purchasing specialists transferred from the purchasing specialist position to a bargaining unit, a tiered position?

A No, not that I recall, ever.

Q Okay. Let's focus on the purchasing specialists' sort of more mundane terms and conditions of employment. What -- what shifts do they work?

A They will work a day shift. Standard office hours at our facility are 7:30 to 4:00 o'clock. They probably actually work something beyond that. I would say they probably work anywhere from 6:30 to 5:00, 5:30, plus maybe some weekends, depending on what is required to get the job done.

Q So it sounds like they are exceeding 40 hours a week?

A Definitely. I would say everyone in the organization is.

Q On a regular basis?

A On a regular basis.

Q And are they paid overtime at a time-and-a-half rate for that?

A No, they are not. They are paid an annual salary and that is their compensation.

Q Does that -- are they -- is their attendance within a given day strictly monitored as to when they show up and when they leave?

A No. They need to be there for interface and so on, for phone calls and so on, but, no, they are not monitored that closely at all. They don't punch a clock or anything like that.

Q Okay. And I take it they are paid on a salary basis?

A They are paid on a salary basis.

Q Okay. What is the salary range currently for the purchasing specialist position, approximately?

A Oh, I would say it probably averages somewhere in the low 50's -- probably ranges from 45 to 60,000.

Q How often does your team, your management team, that is, evaluate the purchasing specialists, evaluate their job performance?

A Everyone is required to have an annual performance with -- and it is really a process. It includes setting objectives. You set them on a joint basis with your direct reports and they are reviewed on a six month -- formally reviewed on a six-month basis.

Q And is that under what Avaya has come to call its PMP or performance management platform?

A Yes, it is.

Q Okay. And depending upon the results of their review, are they eligible for bonuses?

A Yes, they are eligible for -- yes, depending on performance.

Q And that is every six months?

A Every six months.

Q Okay. And is that under what Avaya has come to call its short term incentive plan or STIP?

A Yes, correct.

Q Okay. And are those bonuses guaranteed?

A Absolutely not.

Q Is there in addition to an individual performance component, is there a Company performance component to the bonuses?

A The Company has to perform profitably for them to be able to receive the award.

Q Are the purchasing specialists eligible for raises periodically?

A They are, on an annual basis.

Q Okay. Is that what we have come to call the SMI, or salary merit increase?

A Yes.

Q Is that guaranteed?

A No, it is not. And, again, it is based on performance.

Q If we need to reduce head count within the purchasing specialist ranks due to business necessity, do we do so by seniority?

A No, we do so by performance.

Q And is that under what is known as Avaya's FMP or force management program?

A Yes, FMP, um-hmm.

Q And specifically, how would that work? How would your performance translate into whether you are retained or let go in a reduction?

A At each performance rating session, each individual actually receives a grade, a rating grade and the lowest individuals in that unit would be the ones that would be targeted first.

Q Okay. We have talked about several policies that apply to what we generally call Avaya management employees. Are the purchasing specialists covered by all other Avaya management employee policies?

A Yes, yes, they are.

Q So that would include -- their pension and welfare benefits are all the same -- pension and welfare benefits that you and I would receive say as management employees?

A That is correct.

Q Okay. We have sort of danced around the issue of the tiered employees. Let's just clarify some terminology. What is a tiered employee or what is -- let's start with that. What is a tiered employee?

A Well, a tiered employee probably gets that name because they are pay classifications are Tier -- well, you could be Tier 1 to 5 -- now I think it is probably Tier 2 to Tier 5, so Tier 2, 3, 4 and 5, and different levels of responsibility and assignment and pay.

Q And those are the represented folks?

A Those are all represented.

Q Right?

A Yes.

Q Okay. And on the material management analyst then, I am assuming also that is a tiered title?

A Yes.

Q Okay. What I am going to do, Stan, is -- this is going to be -- what I have done and we can cal this -- what are we up to, 6 now?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Yes, 6.

(Employer Exhibit 6 marked for identification.)

MR. NOLAN: I just went ahead and made a copy of the contract so it would be easier to refer to -- Exhibit 2 -- this just might be a little easier for record purposes. I am sure there is going to be no objection but I would offer this into evidence.

MR. KING: Sure.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. It is received.

(Employer Exhibit 6 received into evidence.)

Q BY MR. NOLAN: All right, Stan. I am showing you what we have offered into evidence as Employer's Exhibit 6, and I will represent to you it is a portion of the Union contract or collective bargaining agreement that is also in evidence. I have just given you this one because it is a little less cumbersome.

If you would please turn to what is marked as page 40, Stan.

A Okay.

Q Okay. This is the contract job description for material management analyst. Are you aware of -- are there any employees in GPO that fall under this classification in the Union contract?

A Not under Tier 4. This is Tier 4.

Q Okay.

A Or 3. So not under Tier 4.

Q So you are saying you have a Tier 5?

A I have a Tier 3 and a Tier 5.

Q Okay.

A Actually, two Tier 3's. One is a secretary.

Q Okay. And just for clarity, looking at the org chart, Employer's Exhibit 2, I see under Sandra Schropp, it looks like a T-V? That is -- she is a Tier 5?

A She is Tier 5.

Q Okay. And that is the job description that is set forth on page 48 -- 46 of the contract that I just showed you?

A Yes.

Q Okay. And let's focus on Ms. Schropp for a moment, please. What does she do?

A She works for, reports to, and is supports Karen Anderson. She really does two things. She does a lot of special projects assigned by Karen. She does some invoice block clearing at the request of buyers. And she does some data entry for us.

Q Okay. Could you compare what she does to what the purchasing specialists do, please?

A What Sandy does is really at the direction of the buyer and it is more than assist type of role. If there is a blocked invoice and a supplier needs to get paid and that is critical, we might have Sandy do that on a short -- on a short notice basis.

If we have a change in a contract and we have to change prices or some kind of terms and it affects multiple codes, we would have Sandy do that, do the update for that.

She really doesn’t do anything similar to any of the buyer, any of the purchasing specialists.

Q All right. Does she have the $100,000 authority that the purchasing specialists have?

A No. Pre --

Q I'm sorry.

A Pre-Avaya Tier 5 had $5000 of spend authority but that was eliminated and Tier 5's do not have any spend authority today.

Q Okay. Is she required to travel to interface with vendors at all?

A No.

Q And other than with the exception of dealing with the blocked invoices, does she interact with vendors on a regular basis?

A No.

Q Does she interact with the corporate legal staff at all?

A No.

Q Does she have discretion -- she obviously doesn't have any spending authority but does she otherwise have discretion in entering into vendor relationships?

A No.

Q As far as you know, is Ms. Schropp a college graduate?

A I don't believe she is. I wouldn't want to take anything away from her if she is but I don't believe she is.

Q Okay. Have there been other employees in Schropp's role in the recent history of the GPO?

A Sure. If we go back, we had an individual recently that retired, Carmen Bicante (phonetic) who was also a Tier 5.

Q I take it Carmen wasn't replaced?

A Carmen was not replaced.

Q Okay. So what happened to the work that Carmen was doing?

A Well, actually it is probably a little bit of a complicated answer but it has been happening for a number of years and what that is, if you go back in history enough, purchasing was a very manual type of process.

And over the years -- and I would say especially over about the last five years -- we have become a very mechanized organization and just to give you a little idea of how the work flows, when a need is created material management organization would create a requisition that they would hand over to the purchasing group and purchasing would then covert that into a purchase order.

At one time, that was all done with a piece of paper so every time there was a requisition there was a piece of paper. We got to the point where we put that on the system so all the pieces of paper now are eliminated and that comes over the system.

The second thing that has happened is we acquired what we call auto source or auto create where the buyer can go into the database, set up a supplier for certain codes, for certain materials and whenever a requisition or a need is identified and passes across from the materials group it automatically generates a purchase order.

Q Okay. Other than -- well, could you describe what level, if any, of data entry type work the purchasing specialists do?

A Well, they would do some price -- some price entry but it would probably be on a -- on a low volume as opposed to the high volume. If there is high volume, we try to either hand that off to Gay or Sandra.

Q And speaking of Gay -- I assume you are referring to Gay Davis?

A Yes.

Q Who also appears on Employer's Exhibit 2?

A Right.

Q It looks like she is a T-3, so she is a Tier 3 employee?

A She is a Tier 3.

Q Okay. What does Gay do for us?

A She does some -- again, some system support, again, mostly at the request of Karen. She also does some MRO or some expense buying that she would do for Crystal Stewart. And so Crystal would ask her to actually do that, do that buy, do that purchasing.

Q Could you explain a little further what that sort of purchasing involves?

A Well, that would be expense items that would typically be low value, non-repetitive, something where you couldn't go out and put a contract in place. It could involve MRO, maintenance and repair, type of items as well.

Q Why don't you give me an example of an item that she would be responsible for buying?

A It could be something that the shop needed that was an expense item. It could be something like packaging material. It could be hand tools. Again, I would say typically low value.

Q Um-hmm. And as far as you know, is Ms. Davis a college graduate?

A I do not believe she is.

Q Okay. It looks like there is one additional tiered employee on your org chart and that appears to be a Cristal Harris. Do you see her?

A Yes.

Q And what does Ms. Harris do?

A She is actually a secretary to really all of the buyers.

Q Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: For purposes of the record, the T-V behind Sandra Schropp's name would be Tier V -- Roman Numeral, correct?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I am just now, you know, getting this, so -- and then Gay Davis, T-III --

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And then up here, Cristal Harris Tier 3?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: So we can tell what tier they are by the demarcation after their names?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Thank you.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Other than the purchasing specialists and it sounded like maybe occasionally for lower dollar items, Ms. Davis or Ms. Schropp, are there any other employees that do any sort of buying for Connectivity Solutions here in Omaha?

A There are -- there are a couple of folks in the maintenance organization that buy -- again, MRO, maintenance repair, MRO stands for maintenance repair organization, so maintenance and repair type of items.

That function was at one time resided in the GPO organization and after a lot of discussion we decided that we didn't really add a lot of value to that because it was low value. It was short term.

There wasn't a lot of discretion available on the source. The item was pre-identified, pre-stipulated, and we agreed to let the maintenance organization do that themselves rather than add another layer to it and run it through the purchasing group. Those people are currently buying today.

Q And just so we are clear, the people that are doing the buying then, that sort of buying are also represented tiered employees?

A Yes, they are.

Q Okay. Could you compare the sort of buying they are doing with the buying that the purchasing specialists do?

A No, the purchasing specialists is really a unique position and it is a unique position because when you look at a business like ours you have what I will call cogs and non-cogs. And cogs is items -- are items that are cost of goods sold so they are part of the product. That is what all the buyers really concentrate on.

The non-cogs is the expense, the associated type of materials and so on that are required to run a business and probably 90 percent of our spend is in the cogs area and that is where we concentrate.

Q And so I take it these individuals that do purchasing in the maintenance organization are purchasing items that you are referring to as non-cogs?

A Non-cogs, expense. Again, I'll -- maintenance -- maintenance and repair type things.

Q All right. And the sort of items that they are purchasing, do they typically require individual contracts?

A No. I would say there are no contracts written beyond the purchase order that goes out for any of those items.

Q And is there typically a negotiation with the supplier over a price?

A You know, I really can't tell you because -- because I don't see what those people do on a day-to-day basis.

Q Okay.

A I would say they don't have much discretion on where they go but they could haggle on pricing and I don't know that.

Q Okay. And, likewise, the individuals that are doing purchasing in the maintenance organization or for the maintenance organization -- they don't have any spending authority, do they?

A They do not. In fact, we run all of the completed purchases back through our system so that the purchase order actually goes out with -- actually goes out with Jim Himes, my counterpart, senior manager's name on the purchase order.

Q Just so I understand you, the items that those individuals are purchasing are not purchased until your organization approves the purchase?

A That is correct.

Q Okay. The three represented individuals within GPO, Ms. Schropp, Ms. Davis and Ms. Harris, as far as you know, are their terms and conditions of employment, things like wages, benefits, that is all set forth in the Union contract?

A Yes.

Q So I take it then, do they receive -- well, do they get annual wage increases?

A I think --

Q If you don't want to speak --

A -- they get -- I think when they -- I don't know.

Q Yes. If you don't want to speak to the contract, that is fine. We have the contract. It says what it says.

What about with respect -- and again if you are not comfortable talking about the contract, that is fine, but what about with respect to any bonuses they may receive? Do you know anything about that?

A Yeah, there is a small bonus that they receive and that is pretty much of an automatic type thing.

Q And if for some reason there happens to be a surplus among the tiered universe and we have to -- we have to exit some of those people from the business, how do we go about doing that?

A Seniority, low seniority out.

Q So as far as you know, performance isn't considered in terms of who is exited?

A It is not.

MR. NOLAN: Okay. I just have one little bit of follow up for the witness and it will involve a document which unfortunately I have one other copy of. Give us a second to pull together some copies. I didn't anticipate we would be using it.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. We can go off the record a second.

MR. NOLAN: I'd like to have marked for identification Employer's Exhibit No. 7.

(Employer Exhibit 7 marked for identification.)

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Okay. I am showing you what is marked for identification purposes as Employer's Exhibit No. 7. Would you just take a look at that please? Are you familiar with that document?

A Yes, I am.

Q Will you please explain what it is?

A This is a job description for purchasing specialist. It was generated by AT&T. It essentially covers the same description that we are using today.

Q You said it was generated by AT&T. How do you know?

A It has the AT&T logo on it.

Q Okay. That probably tells us something.

And do you know offhand when AT&T divested Lucent?

A Oh, like January 1, 1984 or '5. One of those two. I can't remember which one it was.

Q Okay. Just so we are clear, I am not talking about the divestiture of the Bell System. I am talking about when AT&T spun Lucent off.

A Oh --

Q And, again, you don't have -- you know, you don't have to guess. We have ample opportunity to get --

A About seven years back.

MR. NOLAN: Okay. I would just like to offer E-3.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: E-7?

MR. NOLAN: E-7, please.

MR. KING: Could I ask a some foundational questions?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Sure.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

MR. KING: Do you have any knowledge whether this -- this piece of paper -- this job posting was used at the Omaha facility?

THE WITNESS: I am sure it was. It is a job posting that we use or very, very similar to that, every time we an opening.

MR. KING: Is there any way to tell by reading the exhibit --

THE WITNESS: No.

MR. KING: -- that this is used in Omaha?

THE WITNESS: I am sure it was. It is just a matter of how far back we would go. It just changed format over the years.

MR. KING: I don't think the proper foundation -- I would take it for its value but I don't know that I would concede it has been used in Omaha.

MR. NOLAN: Well, I am not offering to say anything about Omaha. I am offering it that it is what it is. It is a job posting for the purchasing specialist and it has an AT&T logo on it and whatever inference can be drawn from that can be drawn from that.

But I could try to clarify that a little bit and it did come from the files of -- I can further, you know, say for the record that --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Well, we can ask the witness. Do you know --

THE WITNESS: I can try and clarify that a little bit and that is that at one time AT&T decided to standardize all of the job descriptions within purchasing that were used throughout the globe and that probably covered 40, 50, 60 facilities, something like that. And so they issued a standard job description.

It was probably when we went away from using that term like assistant buyer or buyer to purchasing specialist and this was the only job description that existed during that time period.

So if we had to use something for advertisement, I am sure we used this.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And that would have been how long ago?

THE WITNESS: Probably -- if you look at the two job descriptions, they are almost identical. So I would say we have been using this same job description for the past 15 plus years.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And E-3 is an Avaya job description?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Was that also -- was that Lucent's or Avaya's?

THE WITNESS: This one is Avaya's but it --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right.

THE WITNESS: -- probably reads almost word for word for Lucent's.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Any objection?

MR. KING: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. It is received. E-7 is received.

(Employer Exhibit 7 received into evidence.)

MR. NOLAN: I have no further questions.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Do you have any cross-examination?

MR. KING: Yes.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

Q BY MR. KING: Did you testify that the purchasing specialists had previously been known as buying assistants, is that correct?

A Assistant buyers.

Q Assistant buyers?

A Correct.

Q Okay. And was that at anytime a bargaining unit position?

A No. That has always been salary Grade 4 or 5.

Q Okay. What was the -- I need the exhibits. Referring to Exhibit E-2, Sandra Schropp?

A Um-hmm.

Q What is her title in the organization?

A Well, if you look on the organization chart, we call her a data steward because that is her primary interface is with data and with the SAP system.

However, I probably have to go back to the agreement because I think this covers everybody in the organization, material management and purchasing that would call her a senior material management analyst.

Q Okay. This organization chart -- again on E-2 -- it is cut off a little but it was generated sometime in 2002 according to the log attached to it?

A Um-hmm. Okay.

Q And on this, it appears that yourself and Jim Himes are peers?

A Yes.

Q And it appears that -- on the right side where you see reporting lines for yourself --

A Yes.

Q -- down through approximately --

A That is correct.

Q -- seven purchasing specialists, is that -- since it is 2002, has that changed recently, is that the way it has been for some period of time?

A It has essentially been this way -- at one time there was only one senior manager and I was promoted into a senior manager roughly say two years ago and prior to that there was only one senior manager and other than that the organization structure has essentially been the same.

Q And what position would you have been in previous to the senior manager position?

A Purchasing manager.

Q Which title -- which name on the chart?

A Probably had all of them at one time but --

Q Okay.

A -- it would be the Karen Dappen, Jim Krambeck, David Slaughter, Jeff Hunt.

Q Okay. You testified that the purchasing specialists have gone to $100,000 since -

A Since Avaya.

Q -- Avaya? And prior to Avaya it was $400,000?

A $400,000, yes.

Q Now you testified that they travel abroad?

A Um-hmm.

Q How does that work? If they are in Europe -- I would assume you don't send them over for a minimum level purchase?

A No, it has to be -- it has to be a major issue or supplier in order to travel to Europe.

Q Do they write contracts that would exceed $100,000 or do they --

A Oh, definitely.

Q -- have to turn it over to someone?

A No. They write contracts for whatever the value is and then they go through an approval process.

Q Okay. So they don't -- and there is very defined authority for purchasing specialists?

A That is correct.

MR. KING: Do you need copies? I have four.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Go ahead. If I need a copy, I will ask the court reporter for her copy.

MR. KING: I'll mark this as Union 1.

(Petitioner Exhibit 1 marked for identification.)

Q BY MR. KING: Can you tell us what this is?

A It is a posting for an opening for a Tier 5.

Q And the contact name is your name? You, in essence, generated this posting?

A That is correct.

Q And who is the employee selected?

A Sandra Schropp?

Q Okay. And it appears this was done in November of '99?

A Yes.

Q Okay. In the -- it is kind of cut off. In the lower, left corner, there is some writing. Can you tell me -- can you read it on yours? Mine says, 'Buying Assistant,' and it is cut off and the --

A It is cut off but I can make that out.

Q I think this is the worst copy. Okay. Is that the same as the buying assistant -- you said that buying assistants were purchasing specialists in the past. What is that term? Why is that there?

A I really don't know. That is not something that I would guess that we used. Again, for clarification, the term that I used for the purchasing specialists was assistant buyer.

Q Assistant buyer.

A Okay. But I could see where somebody could call that a buying assistant and their role would be to help the buyer.

Q Okay. And this is a Tier 5 position?

A Yes.

Q Under the contract? And it appears the qualifications for this include an associate's degree and I'll paraphrase without reading everything?

A Um-hmm. Okay.

Q And this was a successful bid?

A Yes, she occupies the job today.

MR. KING: I offer Union 1.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Do you have any objection to Union 1?

MR. NOLAN: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is received.

(Petitioner Exhibit 1 received into evidence.)

Q BY MR. KING: You testified that the -- the individuals in purchasing specialists 3 that had been transferred in were Schnieders, Bills and Hahn, and all the other individuals were hired of the street, is that -- you testified were --

A New hires is the term.

Q Thank you. New hires was the term that you used?

A It was actually Nathan Bills, though, Thelma Eley, and Bethany Hahn are the three that transferred in. The balance of those people are new hires.

Q Okay. Are they all in close range as far as employee start dates? I am not asking for exact dates but can you --

A I would say the majority of them are within the last three years.

Q Within the last three years?

A Um-hmm.

Q Okay. Prior to that time, was there a slew of retirements or --

A There was. There were retirements and a few people transferred to different organizations for whatever reason.

Q Is it your testimony that you have had approximately this number of hires then for --

A I would probably have to go back and actually count but I think that is similar.

Q Approximately what percentage of the time would a typical buyer spend traveling?

A A small percent like --

Q A few nights a year in hotels?

A I would -- yeah, a few nights a year. I would say a buyer probably six to eight, ten times, something like that, trips.

Q Your testimony on the -- you termed it as on the shop side --

A Yes.

Q -- which I think that is not under this organizational chart and just -- just help me out on what you meant by shop side?

A No, it is not -- it is not on 2 but if you would go to 1, we could probably find it on 1.

If you go over on the left-hand side, you see Ray Swartz and under him is Richard Dell'Asen.

Q Okay.

A So these people worked in the Richard Dell'Asen organization -- backup. Two of them did and one of them worked under probably Chuck Meyers' organization.

Q And your testimony was that tier employees do not do any purchasing other than -- help me out on that. What was your testimony about that?

A Tiered employees do some purchasing, small value, typically at the direction of a buyer, don't write contracts.

Q They don't write contracts?

A No.

MR. KING: Nothing further.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I have a couple of questions. Of did you have redirect before I have my --

MR. NOLAN: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- couple of questions?

EXAMINATION

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: I am looking at Employer's Exhibit 1 and I just want to make sure I understand these organizational structure charts. I never was very good at these.

Avaya -- what you testified before is that Avaya has basically two subordinate organizations?

THE WITNESS: Two main business groups.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. One being?

THE WITNESS: One being CS.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Which is?

THE WITNESS: Connectivity Solutions.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And Connectivity Solutions manufactures certain types of communications?

THE WITNESS: Products.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Products?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And these are the -- and Employer's Exhibit 1 shows the different departments under Connectivity Solutions?

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And over here under Connie Schmidt, you say she is no longer there?

THE WITNESS: Correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So now Bill has moved into her position?

THE WITNESS: No. He has not but a decision was made for him to report directly to Steve Clark.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And then you are under Bill?

THE WITNESS: I am under Bill.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: So your GPO department would then be Employer's Exhibit 2?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And under that, all of the purchasing specialists are under the GPO, is that correct?

THE WITNESS: That is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Now you testified that -- something about several buyer positions moving to Omaha from Greensboro?

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Tell me about that. I didn't quite get that.

THE WITNESS: At one time we had a really quite large Greensboro purchasing operation.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

THE WITNESS: And one of the functions that they did is what we call basic materials and basic materials was for primarily commodity type of items and so it was copper, steel, aluminum, brass, plastics.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: They did most of that purchasing?

THE WITNESS: They did almost all of that. They wrote the contracts and so on.

As we began to downsize, if you will, as a business, we decided to take that purchasing responsibility and bring it into Omaha.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And that was how many years ago?

THE WITNESS: I think five years ago.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And at that time, they were still -- those buyers were still called purchasing specialists?

THE WITNESS: Yes, they were.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. So about five years ago, you probably took on several more or a lot more purchasing specialists than you had had before?

THE WITNESS: We did, that is correct.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. But since five years ago, have you maintained approximately the same number of purchasing specialists in your department as you have now?

THE WITNESS: I think that is true.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Now do these people have cubicles or is it an open room or how is the facility -- the department set up?

THE WITNESS: All of the purchasing specialists and the senior purchasing specialist are in private offices, locked offices. We have two that share an office.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

THE WITNESS: So two people share an office.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And how about your unit people in your GPO office? How are they --

THE WITNESS: They are in a cubicle environment which does not have a door and does not lock.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And in your department, the GPO department, you testified you have just three unit positions in your department?

THE WITNESS: That is right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And has that been consistent? You say you lost one?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Within the last few years?

THE WITNESS: Um-hmm.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: But other than that, it has been fairly consistent?

THE WITNESS: Well, it depends on how far back you want to go.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Probably the last ten years would be good enough for me.

THE WITNESS: I would say if I go back ten years, I have probably had I'll say maybe 15.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Oh, my gosh.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

THE WITNESS: So nine of those individuals were what we term -- they were Tier 5's and they were expediters was their job classification. And we made a decision to transfer the expediting responsibility to the material management group. There were material planners. They had more daily contact with the suppliers and the consensus was they would simply do a better job of expediting.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: So they moved into a different department?

THE WITNESS: So that function was transferred out.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. We also had -- probably at its height we probably had six people that were the Tier 5 -- in fact -- I'm sorry -- not Tier 5, Tier 3 --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Like Gay Davis?

THE WITNESS: Like Gay except what they were mostly doing was handling the flood of paperwork that would come in because we were a manual system.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Because of paperwork and because --

THE WITNESS: Right. And as we became mechanized, I mean, it would take a person all day, as an example, just to fold purchase orders and put them in envelopes.

Purchasing doesn't do that today. That function is gone. We do it electronically and we send out the purchase orders EDI. But that is what has happened to that universe.

Two of those people transferred over to the maintenance organization so we allowed them to do their own purchasing.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And when you talk about people who do purchasing in the maintenance organization, that is a different department that is still associated with Connectivity Solutions?

THE WITNESS: Right the across aisle.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Right?

THE WITNESS: Right across the aisle.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: When you say right across the aisle, they are right in the same physical space as you guys are?

THE WITNESS: From here to the door, about that close in proximity.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And their managers are --

THE WITNESS: Well, let's see --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- Chuck Meyers and Richard --

THE WITNESS: No. These people actually report up through -- well, I'll backup. I think it is Chuck Meyers today. I think -- I think Chuck has the maintenance organization today.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And so his offices or his area is just right with yours as well? I mean, he is right in the same area as you?

THE WITNESS: Chuck Meyers?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Yes?

THE WITNESS: Because of his level -- Chuck is a director.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Oh, okay.

THE WITNESS: And so all of the directors are on a completely different floor. The purchasing operation is on first floor and the directors are on third floor. Just to carry that on, engineering, as an example, is primarily on our second floor.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Well, let me ask you about that then.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: These people who are in the same area who purchase -- and you have explained the differences between their purchasing and what you believe that your purchasing specialists are -- but they are in the same area as you, as your purchasing specialists, correct?

THE WITNESS: (Nods affirmatively.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Do they have cubes or offices or how do they --

THE WITNESS: They have cubes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And are they supervised by people in the GPO?

THE WITNESS: No. They are supervised by somebody in the maintenance organization.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Does that person have an office in the area where they are or does --

THE WITNESS: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Okay. Now I take that the -- your buyers you say work the day shift? The tiered employees also work the day shift?

THE WITNESS: Same shift.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Are they required -- do they have a clock-in, clock-out, sign-in, sign-out, any sort of system to account for their time?

THE WITNESS: They do not clock in or clock out.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

THE WITNESS: They do have a supervisor that would monitor that individual's attendance though.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And that would be --

THE WITNESS: In this case, it is --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Karen Anderson?

THE WITNESS: Right. Karen Anderson.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. And they are hourly employees paid overtime? Or are they paid for --

THE WITNESS: I don't think they are hourly. I think they are actually -- we call them salary graded. I think they are probably paid a monthly wage is the way their wage is stated.

And they would be paid overtime if they were asked to work overtime.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Okay. And how many of these purchase -- I don't want to call them purchasing specialists because -- what are they -- how many material -- senior material analysts are there in the maintenance group who have some buying functions?

THE WITNESS: I believe there are two.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Two? Do you know their names by any chance?

THE WITNESS: One is Shannon Boomer (phonetic) and I don't know the other one.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Thank you.

And they -- the Tier 5 people have an educational requirement do you say generally in their posting?

THE WITNESS: It is seniority.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: They come from within?

THE WITNESS: They come from within.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Is there any educational requirement?

THE WITNESS: There is not an educational requirement per se. In other words, it isn't required that they would have a bachelor's degree but it would -- they would have to have some training in that corridor before they could move to a 5.

So if they were moving from a 4 to a 5, they would have to have some type of training, some type of length of experience.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Did that raise anything for anyone?

MR. NOLAN: No. There is one thing that I think we can stipulate to that Stan misstated and that is that the tiered folks are paid weekly. It is a -- they are weekly salaried, is that --

MS. AESOPH-MANGIARUCA: That is correct.

MR. NOLAN: Yes, so we could --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay.

MR. NOLAN: We all agree to that.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: All right. Is that set forth in the contract somewhere, how they are paid and what their weekly salary is?

MS. AESOPH-MANGIARUCA: Under Article 10.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Article 10, okay.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And the contract would set that forth?

MR. NOLAN: Yes.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Under Article 10. Thank you.

All right. Go ahead.

MR. KING: All right.

FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION

Q BY MR. KING: You testified when questioned about the work moving from Greensboro to Omaha was approximately five years ago?

A Um-hmm.

Q And prior to that, I had asked you if there was any change in the structure and the number of employees and you stated it has been roughly the same for 15 years. Did you --

A Well, excepting -- excepting a move like that. We have done -- the GPO organization has probably ranged from 25 to 35 people as functions have transferred in and out.

As an example, we used to have the transportation function within GPO and we transferred the transportation function out to our logistics organization so that would have been a reduction.

We transferred functions in like the centralized buying function that was done.

Q Did anyone physically transfer from Greensboro to Omaha who was performing a purchasing specialist job?

A Not on the basic materials function. There was -- we transferred another function which was -- it was like a field support purchasing job where when you did an installation -- on-site installation, the installers would need certain products and so on and we moved that function to Omaha. We transferred the buyer to Omaha.

Q I mean the rest of the positions that were identified. We did it by name but on the positions identified --

A That was a purchasing specialist.

Q -- would any of those have transferred from Greensboro?

MR. NOLAN: Just so we are clear, you mean the actual people listed on E-2?

MR. KING: The people or by their job title maybe.

MR. NOLAN: Okay.

MR. KING: For example --

THE WITNESS: No.

Q BY MR. KING: -- CM/OEM?

A No. No.

Q Without stating what that means?

A No.

Q So were some of these then new functions at -- new to Omaha functions when the authority transferred from Greensboro? What does that mean?

A That means we had to populate that job to be able to perform that function.

Q And which jobs were those?

A Those were essentially the jobs under the Jim Himes' organization so it was the jobs that were associated with the electronic wiring, cable, the plastics, the copper. We also picked up a couple of jobs under my site of responsibility which were plastics and brass so there are a couple of people that have those responsibilities in their titles.

Q So maybe five of these 14 were created -- were -- maybe created is the wrong term but as far as from an Omaha perspective, new at that time?

A I would say three to five.

Q And because there is perhaps a question as to a bar relating to the -- the date of the contract is in '98, approximately four years ago. Can you be any more specific on when that was done as far as moving from Greensboro to Omaha?

A I really can't without looking back. I -- I would say it was prior to that date, though, just trying to think of some of the management people that were in place.

Q I understand.

A Prior to four years ago.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Prior to the contract?

THE WITNESS: Prior to the contract.

MR. KING: Can I still offer an exhibit?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Sure.

MR. KING: Did I offer the other document?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: We will have to ask the court reporter. Did he offer Union 1?

COURT REPORTER: I don't have it marked as received.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. If you haven't, would you offer that?

MR. KING: I offer Union 1.

MR. NOLAN: No objection.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is received.

MR. KING: Have you had an opportunity to read that?

THE WITNESS: Yes.

(Petitioner Exhibit 2 marked for identification.)

Q BY MR. KING: Can you tell us what this is?

A It is a job requisition posting for a buyer.

Q Is this what is used to staff the position?

A This is what would have been advertised.

Q And this is -- this is different from the job description that was offered as E-3?

A Well, I would say essentially it is not different. What it is is as we have changed processes by which we have advertised, we have been constrained on the number of lines and letters and words we can use and it is essentially the same job description. So this is an A-4 job description.

Q Okay. And then dealing with the last sentence, BA/BS PURCH SCI/BS ADM/MBA desired?

A Um-hmm.

Q These are -- this is saying college degree desired, correct?

A Well, we would say that a bachelor's degree is required and we prefer to have a master's. And if you don't have the master's when you come to the job, we encourage you strongly to go get a master's.

Q This states that it is required?

A No, I don't think it says that.

MR. NOLAN: I just --

A It doesn't say one way or the other.

MR. NOLAN: I object to the line of questioning. The document says what it says.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: The document does say what it says.

Q BY MR. KING: The 15 purchasing specialists, do you know, did all of them have degrees prior to being hired or did some of them earn them after?

A All of them had bachelor's degrees. Let me just verify that real quick. All had bachelor's degrees when they came into purchasing.

MR. KING: Nothing further.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: To engage in overkill, do all of the employees have a break room that they can use or --

THE WITNESS: There is a cafeteria. There is a Company cafeteria.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: And that is available to --

THE WITNESS: Everybody.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- production, maintenance, clerical --

THE WITNESS: Right.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: -- managerial? Everybody?

THE WITNESS: Um-hmm.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. And does your office have its own set of washrooms or is there --

THE WITNESS: No, there is a washroom that is close to our area but anybody in that area uses that washroom.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Okay. That is all I have. Did that raise anything for anybody?

MR. KING: I need to offer Union 2.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Okay. Any objection?

MR. NOLAN: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is received.

(Petitioner Exhibit 2 received into evidence.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Thank you, Mr. Mason.

(Witness excused.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Do you have another witness?

MR. NOLAN: Yes. It might not be -- could we go off a second?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Sure. Off the record.

(Off the record.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Back on the record.

Mr. Nolan, do you have another witness?

MR. NOLAN: Okay. The Company calls Ms. Gretchen Riemersma.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Raise your right hand, please.

Whereupon,

GRETCHEN RIEMERSMA,

having first been duly sworn, was called as a witness and examined and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Gretchen, who do you currently work for?

A Avaya Inc.

COURT REPORTER: Spelling?

MR. NOLAN: Oh, okay. R-i-e-m-e-r-s-m-a. All right?

COURT REPORTER: Gretchen?

THE WITNESS: G-r-e-t-c-h-e-n.

COURT REPORTER: Okay. And the last name again?

THE WITNESS: Riemersma, R-i-e-m-e-r-s-m-a.

COURT REPORTER: Thank you.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Okay. Avaya Inc. And what is your position with Avaya?

A I am senior manager for Customer Care Center.

Q And how long have you held that position?

A Since December of 2001.

Q And prior to assuming your current position as senior manager of the Customer Care Center, what position did you hold with Avaya?

A I was manager of the product realization area and SAP deployment.

Q Okay. let's start up here with an organizational chart.

MR. NOLAN: Actually we might want to go off -- did we find --

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Off the record.

(Off the record.)

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Back on the record.

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Okay. I am showing you, Gretchen, what has been marked for identification purposes as Employer's Exhibit 8. Do you recognize that document?

(Employer Exhibit 8 marked for identification.)

A Yes.

Q What is this document?

A This is my organization chart.

Q Okay. I am also going to show you what was previously marked as Employer's Exhibit E-1 and admitted into evidence which is the overall Connectivity org chart. Could you just explain to us where you fit in -- well, specifically where your organization as reflected by Employer's Exhibit 8 fits in on Employer's Exhibit No. 1?

A I am -- in the Exhibit No. 1, I am shown reporting into Connie Schmidt. Connie retired at the end of January so I currently report in to Larry Bailey who is also on the same chart.

Q And I take it then with Connie not there, Larry is reports directly now to Steve Clark?

A Larry reports into Ray Swartz.

Q Okay. So is it fair to say that indirectly you report to Ray Swartz?

A Yes.

Q Okay. Do you have an understanding as to whether that relationship is temporary or do you think that is going to continue for --

A That relation --

Q -- the indefinite future?

A That relationship I know is in place as far as performance management. I don't know beyond the scope of that if it is in place or not.

Q Okay. So -- I don't want you to speculate but is it possible that, for instance, Avaya could replace someone in Connie Schmidt's former role?

A Yes, that would be possible.

MR. NOLAN: I would like to offer E-8 into evidence, please?

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: Any objection?

MR. KING: No.

HEARING OFFICER TAVES: It is received.

(Employer Exhibit 8 received into evidence.)

Q BY MR. NOLAN: Gretchen, could you please explain for us what the Customer Care Center does within Avaya?

A The Customer Care Center has a number of responsibilities. The primary function is that of order management, dealing with the customers and entering their orders and the activities surrounding that.

We also provide asset management expertise and then the resource center, which is that group on the right-hand side there, provides second-level technical support for customers.

Q Okay. Looking at the organization chart, could you explain for us in a little more detail how the organization is organized? That is, is it a functional organizational breakdown or how does that work?

A It is kind of a matrix approach. We have the persons responsible directly for customers that deal with the customers on a day-to-day basis are organized by the customers that they support.

Under Cassandra Smith, on the left-hand side, she has Ernie who reports to her, and those customers support what we call the distribution channel under Ann Blaya-Arena and Carolyne there. We have the customers that support our OE -- or the CSR's that support the SPN customers, the OEM's, and that kind of activity.

Q I'm sorry to interrupt you, Gretchen, but just because we will probably ask you anyway, try and refrain from acronyms because for record purposes it would be better if we spelled things out. I happen to know SPN is service provider network but if you could maybe spell out what the acronyms stand for and what they mean as you are giving us the description, that would be very useful.

A Okay. The distribution partners are -- when I talked about distribution -- are those customers that buy product from us, stock it and then resell it, through that channel.

The OEM and group under Carolyne, those are people that buy our product and market it for us. The SPN's are the -- or RHC's sometimes is what they are called, are the old Bell companies like Quest, Bell South, and those.

Q Okay. I interrupted you and I'm sorry. Continue describing the organization universe.

A Okay. Continuing under Ann Blaya-Arena, you see Alyssa Wernlund. She supports the international people. Other than Leo, all of those people are in country with the customers that they support.

Asset management is the next group there. They do the financial end once the customer is invoiced or handling disputes.

And then like I said, the resource center handles the technical issues.

Q Okay. And just for clarity, let's take, of example, there is an employee here, Kerri Starr who is under Ernie's organization. Do you see Kerri?

A Yes, she supports the customer Anixter.

Q Okay. And that is my question. So Anixter refers to the specific customer that she is dedicated to?

A Yes.

Q All right. And likewise, looking under Carolyne's world, I see Phil Alexander has Lucent under his name. Does that mean he is dedicated to Lucent?

A Yes.

Q And just to clarify, Anixter would be what you call a distributor that buys Avaya product and then sells it to other people?

A Yes.

Q And Lucent would be a company that actually buys our product and uses it?

A Yes.

Q And that would be more the service provider equipment?

A An OEM.

Q OEM, what does that stand for?

A Original equipment manufacturer.

Q Okay. Now I notice under Alyssa is it Wernlund?

A Wernlund.

Q Wernlund, I apologize. It indicates the Cala Region. What does that mean?

A That is the -- supports the customers that are either in the South American region or Canada.

Q Okay. And I see under there, there are individual countries list