16. Proposed Settlement with Local 483 (Appendix 8)

SoCalGas and Local 483 offered Ex. SDG&E/SCG-255 as a proposed settlement. (Appendix 8.) The agreement would grant certain preferential treatment to the union. We reject this settlement as not in the public interest and unsupported by the record.

Although Local 483 never filed a protest it appeared at the prehearing conference. It never served testimony, never cross-examined a single witness (applicant or intervenor) and provided no factual basis for the adoption of the proposed settlement. SoCalGas did sponsor a settlement witness at the request of the assigned ALJ. The settlement would grant Local 483 preferential treatment by funding new positions not otherwise requested in the application; would perform staffing studies to possibly up-grade some incumbent employees, and fill certain vacant positions. (Ex. SDG&E/SCG-255, pp. 1-3, paragraphs 2-9.)

We find this proposal fails to constitute a true settlement: there is no defined dispute between SoCalGas and Local 483 supported by testimony or examination of witnesses; the remedies within the settlement, an increase in positions or re-evaluation of classifications, are items most appropriately be addressed through collective bargaining.

There was no request for these labor concessions in the application and the agreement itself says "The parties agree that actions listed in paragraphs 2 through 9 of this Settlement Agreement will be funded within the overall revenue requirement authorized in the GRC." We find that SoCalGas unreasonably proposes to fund the settlement from the adopted rates - rates based either on the litigated outcome when this settlement was first proposed, or now, presumably, under the Test-Year 2008 settlement rates adopted herein. We find the terms of the settlement are not in response to any litigated issue which needs to be resolved, and impinges upon collective bargaining between SoCalGas and a labor union.

Finally, we believe this proposal would unreasonably address matters which are properly within the scope of collective bargaining. SoCalGas and Local 483 are in fact "negotiating" a labor agreement as part of a rate case - Local 483 "agreed" to a lesser outcome if the adopted rates are lower than requested by SoCalGas. Therefore, we reject the proposed settlement between SoCalGas and Local 483 as not in the public interest and not supported by the evidentiary record of the proceeding.