AELE LAW LIBRARY OF CASE SUMMARIES:
Employment & Labor Law for Public Safety Agencies
Back to list of subjects Back to Legal Publications Menu
Collective Bargaining - In General
Unions representing federal employees sued President Donald Trump over various aspects of three executive orders regarding relations between the federal government and its employees. The “Collective Bargaining Order” provided agencies with certain procedures that they should seek to institute during negotiations with unions. This order also tells agencies not to negotiate over "permissive" subjects, defined as those that are negotiable "at the election of the agency.” The “Official Time Order” instructs agencies to aim to limit the extent to which collective bargaining agreements authorize “official time,” meaning time spent by employees on union business during working hours. This order also established rules that limit whether “agency time and resources” may be used by employees on non-government business. The “Removal Procedures Order” instructs agencies to seek to exclude from grievance proceedings any dispute over a decision to remove an employee “for misconduct or unacceptable performance.” Subject to various exceptions, this order also prohibits agencies from resolving disputes over employee ratings and incentive pay through grievance or arbitration proceedings, and mandates that some subpar employees may have no more than thirty days to improve their performance before being reassigned, demoted, or fired. The trial court found that some of the provisions were unlawful and enjoined them from being implemented. A federal appeals court overturned that ruling, holding that the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction. The unions were required to pursue their claims through the scheme established by the Federal Service Labor Management Relations Statute, which provides for initial administrative review by the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA). Only following that could the unions seek judicial review in a federal appeals court. The unions could not bypass the FLRA by filing a lawsuit in a federal district court challenging the President’s actions. American Federation of Government Employees v. Trump, #18-5289, 2019 U.S. App. Lexis 20957 3122446 (D.C. Cir.).
A federal appeals court granted an employer’s review of an NLRB order finding that it had committed an unfair labor practice by failing to bargain with a union before terminating five correctional employees. The NLRB held that the employer was liable for a substantially longer period of back pay after the parties bargained over the effects of an impasse and then held the impasse was unlawful. The federal appeals court held that the order was not supported by substantial evidence because there was no substantial evidence to support the finding that the parties did not reach a lawful impasse. Therefore, the court remanded to the NLRB to assess more carefully whether the employer’s offer to the union exceeded the required amount. On remand, the Board may find that the employer reached a lawful impasse and therefore owed each employee only two weeks of back pay. Pennsylvania State Corrections Officers Association v. NLRB, #16-1328, 894 F.3d 370 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
The Supreme Court of Texas ruled that deputy county constables were “police officers” entitled to enter into a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with their employers under state law. It further held that an arbitrator did not exceed his authority in awarding relief to the deputy constables. The county argued that the arbitrator exceeded his authority in concluding that the county violated the CBA by eliminating several deputy constable positions without regard to seniority and ordering the county to reinstate the deputies in order of seniority. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that deputy constables are “police officers” under the CBA, that the CBA was valid and enforceable, and that the arbitrator did not exceed his authority in ordering the deputies’ reinstatement on a seniority basis. Jefferson County v. Jefferson County Constables Assn., #16-0498, 2018 Tex. Lexis 314.
The highest court in New York ruled that the New York State Public Employment Relations Board erred in finding that the city engaged in an improper employment practice by adopting police disciplinary procedures other than those in its collective bargaining agreement with police officers because the more general Civil Service Law art. 14, on public employees’ collective bargaining, was superseded by the more specific Second Class Cities Law §§ 131 and 133, providing detailed police discipline procedures, so police discipline was not a collective bargaining subject. Such bargaining was now prohibited. The city's collective bargaining on police discipline did not judicially estop its different procedures because it bargained before a decision that statutory grants of local control made police discipline an improper collective bargaining subject. City of Schenectady v. N.Y. State Public Employment Relations Board, 2017 NY Slip Op 07210, 2017 N.Y. Lexis 3074.
A California county implemented a
new policy that required technology employees represented by the Service
Employees International Union, Local 721 to undergo and pass a background
check. An employee's failure to pass the background check was cited as grounds
for termination. The county and union negotiated over the effects of the
policy, but failed to reach an agreement. The union declared an impasse, but
the county turned down an offer to mediate. The union then submitted a request
to the Public Employment Relations Board for fact-finding, a request the Board
granted over the county's objection. The county went to court, arguing that the
fact-finding provisions of the statute empowering the Board applied only to an
impasse from negotiations for a new or successor contract, not to discrete
constitutional violations. It also argued that the statute's fact-finding
provision's violated its constitutional right to set employee compensation. An
intermediate state appeals court rejected these arguments, finding that the
fact-finding provisions applied to impasses that occur during negotiation over
any bargainable matter, and the fact-finding provisions, since they did not
divest a county or city of any final decision-making authority, were
constitutional. Co. of Riverside v. Public Employment Relations Bd., #D069065,
2016 Cal. App. Lexis 244.
A union representing 40,000 Illinois state
employees negotiated a multi-year collective bargaining agreement providing for
certain raise at intervals throughout the life of the contract. Because of
declining state revenues and potential layoffs, the union and state agreed to
$300 million in cost savings, including deferring one raise. After adoption of
a final state budget, a state Department of Central Management notified
agencies and labor relations administrators that wage increases could not be
implement in 14 agencies because of insufficient appropriations. An arbitrator
issued an award in favor of the union, based on the raises mandated in the
collective bargaining agreement. The Illinois Supreme Court vacated the award,
finding that it violated state public policy as reflected in the appropriations
clause of the state Constitution and the state Public Labor Relations Act. The
award was contrary to public policy and unenforceable because it ordered
immediate payment without regard to the existence of appropriations. Illinois
v. Am. Fed'n of State, County & Mun. Employees, Council 31, #118422, 2016
IL 118422, 2016 Ill. Lexis 279.
A woman was employed by the
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and was covered by a collective
bargaining agreement. The employer placed her on a performance improvement plan
after she was found to have unsatisfactory performance, and was subsequently
evaluated as having failed to improve. This eventually led to her termination.
She took the issue to arbitration, which was allowed but not required under the
agreement. The arbitrator concluded that she could not challenge the key bases
for her removal with respect to her failure to improve her performance under
the improvement plan. The collective bargaining agreement, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
7121, spelled out the exclusive process, including time limits, for challenging
the determinations of her unsatisfactory performance, but the employee had
abandoned the process after initially filing grievances, so the time deadlines
had passed. Accordingly, the arbitrator barred any reconsideration of issues
raised in her prior grievances or that could have been raised then. A federal
appeals court upheld this result, finding that the arbitrator acted properly in
enforcing a grievance process that the collective bargaining agreement
designated as the exclusive remedy. Appleberry v. Dep't of Homeland Sec.,
#14-3123, 2015 U.S. App. Lexis 11715 (Fed. Cir.).
Public employees of the state of Illinois have a
statutory right to non-association with a union based on bona fide religious
tenet or teachings of church or religious body of which such employees are
members. They are entitled to pay an amount equal to their fair share dues to a
non-religious charity rather than to a union. The plaintiff, a public employee
whose coworkers were represented by the Teamsters, notified the union that he
did not wish to join the union and wanted to donate his union dues to a
charity. The union failed to respond to his email and took receipt of his
fair-share dues, failing to put them into escrow. The court held that the
collective bargaining agreement failed to safeguard the plaintiff's right of
non-association, and that this failure constituted an unfair labor practice by
both the union and the employer. Trygg v. The Illinois Relations Board, 2014 IL
App (4th) 130505.2014 Ill. App. Lexis 299.
A union representing IRS employees wanted to
changes its collective bargaining agreement to allow probationary employees to
utilize the contract's grievance procedures to oppose removals arguably in
violation of an employee's statutory rights. The IRS declined to negotiate on
the issue, saying that allowing this would give probationary employees more
procedural protections than the law allows. The FLRA agreed and so did a
federal appeals court, saying that a decision to the contrary would ignore the
regulatory and statutory framework developed by Congress, fly in the face of
around 30 years of settled public employment practices and create a split in
the rulings of the federal circuit courts of appeal. National Treasury
Employees Union v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, #12-2574, 2013 U.S. App.
Lexis 24298 (4th Cir.),
A lawsuit was filed over a dispute about whether
a collective bargaining agreement governed a controversy over the city refusing
to hire a member of the FOP Labor Council to operate a snow plow when he was
off duty. The contract stated that only grievances concerning an express
provision would be subject to submission to arbitration. Accordingly, not every
police officer grievance could be arbitrated. The city was not obligated to
arbitrate the immediate dispute since there was no contract provision saying
that any officer could arbitrate a failure to hire him to run a snowplow while
off duty. City of Naperville v. Illinois Fraternal Order of Police, 2013 IL App
(2d) 121071, 2013 Ill. App. Lexis 654.
Michigan's governor appointed an emergency
manager for a city having economic difficulties. That manager, acting under a
law known as Public Act 4, modified the collective bargaining agreements of the
city's retired employees. He also modified severance benefits, including
pension benefits, that the city had previously given to retirees who were not
covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Retired employees challenged the
emergency manager's power to reduce their retirement benefits, claiming that it
violated their federal constitutional rights under the Contracts Clause, the
Due Process Clause, and the Bankruptcy Clause. A federal appeals court noted
that there was a question of Michigan state law as to whether the legislature
violated the state constitution in passing Public Act 4, and, additionally,
that Michigan's voters had subsequently rejected Public Act 4 in a ballot
referendum, which may have rendered the emergency manager's actions void. The
appeals court, therefore, declined to rule on the federal constitutional
claims, remanding for further proceedings to determine whether the actions
taken under the now rejected law still have any power. City of Pontiac Retired
Emps. Ass'n v. Schimmel, #12-2087, 2013 U.S. App. Lexis 16519, 2013 Fed. App.
0215P (6th Cir.).
A firefighters union was entitled to a judgment
in its favor when it presented evidence to support its interpretation of the
collective bargaining agreement that the city was required to give step pay
increases to all eligible firefighters. The City failed to present any real
evidence to the contrary. The lawsuit was filed when the city refused to give
pay increases to five firefighters who qualified for a step increase in pay.
Sheridan Fire Fighters Local No. 276 v. City of Sheridan, #S-12-0108, 2013 WY
36, 2013 Wyo. Lexis 40.
The highest court in New York ruled that a city
and firefighters union which entered into a collective bargaining agreement
were not required to arbitrate a dispute over the meaning of a "no
lay-off" clause in the agreement after the city abolished a number of
municipal jobs, including six firefighter positions, based on alleged budgetary
necessity. A job security provision can be enforceable, but only if it is
explicit, comprehensive, and unambiguous. In this case, the contractual
language did not explicitly prohibit the city from eliminating firefighter jobs
out of budgetary necessity. In the Matter of the Arbitration between Johnson
City Professional Firefighters Local 921, #191, 2011 N.Y. Lexis 3251, 2011 NY
Slip Op 8226.
New York appellate court affirms an
arbitration award that found that management unreasonably withheld paid release
time for union officials to prepare for upcoming contract negotiations.
Management's justification of reducing overtime costs was unreasonable, absent
evidence of financial exigency. Arbitration betw. Monroe Co. Sheriff's Office
and Deputy Sheriffs Assn, #1576-CA-10-01338, 2010 N.Y. App. Div. Lexis 10001,
2010 NY Slip Op 9797 (4th Dept.).
National Labor Relations board, in a
precedent-setting action, challenges the termination of a private sector
employee who was discharged for posting unflattering remarks about her superior
in her Facebook web page. Section 7 of the Taft-Hartley Act protects a worker's
right to engage in union or concerted activities. NLRB Region 34 v. American
Medical Response of Connecticut, #34-CA-125767 (Complaint filed 10/27/2010).
NLRB Press Release.
Reversing a lower court, a California appellate
panel revives an arbitration award. The arbitrator had ordered the
reinstatement of a city employee accused of sexual harassment because the
collective bargaining agreement required disciplinary action to be implemented
within six months from learning of the alleged misconduct, and the city did not
act in time. City of Richmond v. SEIU, L-1021, #A127492, 2010 Cal.App. Lexis
1827 (2010).
Oklahoma Supreme Court invalidates a city's
two-year collective bargaining agreement with firefighter's union that
contained a 6.1% wage hike in the second year. The state constitution prohibits
a political subdivision, without voter approval, from creating an obligation in
one year that results in a debt in a succeeding year. City of Stillwater v.
IAFF L-2095, #107477, 2010 OK 55, 2010 Okla. Lexis 61.
Bankruptcy court rules that a city has the authority to
void its existing union contracts in its effort to reorganize. Public workers
lack the protections of union workers for private companies. In re City of
Vallejo, Calif., #08-26813, Memorandum decision (PACER Doc. 473); Findings of
Fact & Conclusions of Law (Bank. E.D. Cal. 2009).
Municipal retirement
benefits carry with them an inference that they will continue, and under
settled principles of collective bargaining, retirees' health insurance
benefits in prior bargaining agreements survive the expiration and cannot be
diminished without the consent of the retired workers. DiBattista v. Co. of
Westchester, #19762/04, 2008 N.Y. Misc. Lexis 5212.
Missouri Supreme Court holds that public
employees enjoy a Constitutional right to collective bargaining.
Independence-National Educ. Assn. v. Independence School Dist., #SC87980, 223
S.W.3d 131, 2007 Mo. Lexis 83.
Missouri Supreme Court overrules a 1947 case that
held that public employees do not have right to bargain collectively; the
decision conflicts with the plain language of the state constitution, which
gives all employees, public or private, the right to bargain. Independence-NEA
v. School Dist., #SC87980, 181 LRRM (BNA) 3224, 2007 Mo. Lexis 83 (2007).
Ninth Circuit rules against a public employee's
denial of due process lawsuit because a collective bargaining agreement
provided multi-level grievance procedures, which the plaintiff failed to use.
Micone v. Carey, #04-16811, 2006 U.S. App. Lexis 24663 (Unpub. 9th Cir. 2006).
{N/R}
A member of a bargaining unit cannot file a
breach-of-contract lawsuit, even if the employee was not member of union and
never paid union dues. Rose v. Beverly Health Serv., #1:06cv0067, 2006 U.S.
District Lexis 54530, 180 LRRM (BNA) 2559 (E.D. Calif. 2006). {N/R}
Labor Dept. rules that overtime hours apply
during prisoner transport assignments, even though a bargaining agreement
purports to limit duty time to 8 hours a day. A CBA cannot override federal
overtime laws. U.S. Dept. of Labor, Wage and Hour Div. Opinion Letter,
#FLSA2006-12NA (2006), citing Barrentine v. Arkansas-Best Freight Systems., 450
U.S. 728, 740-41 (1981). [2006 FP Nov].
Oklahoma Supreme Court upholds a municipal
employee collective bargaining law as constitutional. City of Enid v. PERB,
#101,729, 2006 OK 16, 2006 Okla. Lexis 12, 179 LRRM (BNA) 2328. {N/R}
Illinois appellate court holds for purposes of
the state's bargaining laws, the Dept. of Corrections is not a "joint
employer" of workers hired by a medical services contracting firm. AFSCME
C-31 v. Illinois State Labor Rel. Bd., #99074, 216 Ill.2d 569, 839 N.E.2d 479,
2005 Ill. Lexis 975 (2005). {N/R}
"The existence of a collective bargaining
agreement is primarily a question of fact, not a question of law," and if
an arbitrator finds that the parties agreed on an issue, management cannot
disavow the matter at a later time. Dept. of Homeland Security and AFGE L-2805,
#0-AR-3920, 2005 FLRA Lexis 103, 61 FLRA No. 26 (FLRA 2005). {N/R}
Federal District Court concludes that certain
Homeland Security regulations deprive union members of their statutory right to
enter into legally enforceable bargaining agreements. Natl. Treas. Employees
Union v. Chertoff, #05-201, 2005 U.S. Dist. Lexis 17216, 177 LRRM (BNA) 3089
(D.D.C. 2005). [2005 FP Nov]
Although nonfederal employers are not required to
pay workers for time spent traveling from home to work, under the 1947
Portal-to-Portal Act they may do so, if a bargaining agreement so provides; see
29 U.S. Code §254(b)(1). Federal agencies may not pay for time spent traveling
from home to a location that is within an employee's official duty station,
even if the compensation was provided for in a bargaining agreement. Because the
Congress delegated to the OPM the authority to make government-wide regulations
and the OPM has determined that commuting time within an employee's official
duty station is not compensable, the Ninth Circuit has held that a bargaining
agreement's extra compensation provision is void. 5 C.F.R. §551.422(b). Natl.
Treas. Employees Union v. FLRA, #03-74093, 418 F.3d 1068, 177 LRRM (BNA) 3145,
2005 U.S. App. Lexis 16901 (9th Cir. 2005). {N/R}
Seventh Circuit holds that an employer may not
impose return-to-work standards that are more burdensome than the provisions of
the Family Medical Leave Act, even if those requirements are embodied in a
collective bargaining agreement. Harrell v. US Postal Serv., #03-4204 2005,
U.S. App. Lexis 14550 (7th Cir. 2005). [2005 FP Oct]
Federal court holds that a union waiver of the
substantive statutory rights of employees, contained in a bargaining agreement,
is unenforceable. Canine officers were entitled to assert FLSA overtime claims
irrespective of the language in a Memorandum of Understanding. Bull v. United
States, #01-56 C, 2005 U.S. Claims Lexis 118,177 LRRM (BNA) 2137(Fed. Cl.
2005). [2005 FP Aug]
Union firefighters had no expectation of
continued wage increases once a bargaining agreement has expired. City of
Winter Springs v. Prof. Firefighters, #1D03-3157, 885 So.2d 494, 2004 Fla. App.
Lexis 16609 (1st Dist. 2004). {N/R}
IndianaGovernor rescinds collective bargaining
rights for state employees. Instead of filing grievances leading to
arbitration, tenured workers can appeal to the State Employees Appeals
Commission, which will determine whether a suspension, demotion, or dismissal
"was based on inadequate performance or inappropriate behavior."
Executive Order 05-14. {N/R}
Newly elected Governor of Missouri honors a
campaign pledge to rescind the collective bargaining rights of state employees.
He also vetoes a bill allowing the forced deductions of union dues for nonunion
workers. Executive Order 05-01 (Rescinding Executive Order #01-09), 02 (11)
Workplace Law Rep. (BNA) 403 (2005), relying on Kinder v. Holden, #WD 61067, 92
S.W.3d 793, 2002 Mo. App. Lexis 2414, 171 LRRM (BNA) 3252 (2002). [2005 FP Mar]
New York's highest court holds that an interest
arbitration award which had granted more favorable overtime pay calculations to
officers must be honored, even after the contract with the union had expired.
The city could not revert to the former way of overtime calculations. Town of
Southampton v. New York State PERB, #3-85, 2 N.Y.3d 513, 813 N.E.2d 602 (2004).
{N/R}
Pennsylvania appellate court holds that a public
employer is not required to honor continuing wage increases mandated by an
expired bargaining agreement. Pa. State Park Officers Assn. v. Pa. Labor Rltns.
Bd., #2671 C.D. 2003, 2004 Pa. Commw. Lexis 549 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004). {N/R}
The NLRB has ruled that student assistants are
not "employees" within the meaning of federal bargaining laws, and
dismissed a union's petition to represent a unit of students who serve as
teaching and research assistants and proctors at a university. Brown Univ. and
UAW, #1-RC-21368, 342 NLRB No. 42, 175 LRRM 1089, 2004 NLRB Lexis 385 (NLRB
2004). The 3-to-2 decision overrules the Board's decision four years ago in New
York Univ., and UAAAIW, 332 N.L.R.B. 1205, 2000 NLRB Lexis 748, 332 NLRB No.
111 (2000). {N/R}
H.R 1588-230, which created the Dept. of Defense
National Security Personnel System, changes in the way the DoD will hire, pay,
promote, discipline and fire its 320,000 civilian employees. The legislation
effect members of more than 1,300 local bargaining units. [2004 FP Jun]
Federal Labor Relations Authority upholds a
management decision to deny bargaining rights to certain Transportation
Security Administration workers. DHS Transportation Security Admin. and AFGE,
#WA-RP-03-0023, 2003 FLRA Lexis 183, 59 FLRA No. 63 (FLRA 2003). [2003 FP Feb]
National union files a civil action challenging
the DoT directive that precludes collective bargaining rights for TSA airport
security personnel. AFGE v. Loy (D.D.C. 2003). {N/R}
Florida Supreme Court holds that sheriff's
deputies are entitled to form unions and bargaining for improved pay and
benefits. The justices overturned a 1978 holding that Fla. 1978), holding that
deputy sheriffs are not public employees. Coastal Fla. Police Benevolent Assn.
v. Williams, #SC00-1860, 2003 Fla. Lexis 105 (Fla. 2003). {N/R}
The President has exempted certain Dept. of Justice
personnel from collective bargaining rights under 5 U.S. Code Ch. 71. The
affected employees have intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or
national security work as a primary function. Amendment to Executive Order No.
12171. {N/R}
Ohio appeals court enforces arbitration award
confirming a bargaining agreement between the union and the sheriff, which the
county commissioners had refused to sign. FOP v. Halleck, #99-CO-71, 143 Ohio
App.3d 171, 757 N.E.2d 831, 2001 Ohio App. Lexis 2123 (7th Dist. Ohio. App.
2001). [2002 FP Mar]
U.S. Office of Personnel Management creates an
Internet based collective bargaining agreements resource library.
www.opm.gov/cplmr/lairs.html-ssi
A city's collective bargaining agreement could
extend the period of probationary employment from six months, provided under
city charter, to one year. Somers v. Minneapolis, #00-1849, 245 F.3d 782, 2001
U.S. App. Lexis 5113 (8th Cir.). {N/R}
Arbitrator concludes that a sheriff did not
violate the bargaining agreement pertaining to employee raises when the
relevant part of the agreement was erroneously omitted from the printed
contract. Gallia Co. Sheriff and FOP Ohio Labor Council, 115 LA (BNA) 633 (C.
Kohler 2001). {N/R}
Federal legislation is reintroduced to mandate
bargaining in state and local public safety employment. S. 952, "Public
Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (of 2001)." [115]
Arbitrator rules that a web page announcement can
not modify a the content of a collective bargaining agreement or change the
meaning of a CBA term or phrase. A website differs from an employee handbook or
rules applicable to employment. San Antonio (City of) and San Antonio POA, AAA
Case #70-390-00121-98, 115 LA (BNA) 513 (Moore, 2001). [72-3]
Illinois appellate court upholds the joint
representation of public safety labor organizations, when bargaining with the
City of Chicago. Illinois follows NLRB principles when joint representation is
allowed. Illinois FOP v. ILLRB,# 1-00-1247, 319 Ill. App.3d 729, 745 N.E.2d
647, 2001 Ill. App. Lexis 110 (2001). {N/R}
Appellate court declines to enforce an amendment
to the bargaining agreement, signed by the mayor, but not submitted to the city
council. Belleville (City of) v. FOP, #98-MR-286, 312 Ill.App.3d 561, 732
N.E.2d 592, 2000 Ill. App. Lexis 202. [2000 FP 83]
A police union's acceptance of a contract that
provides a pay differential for police captains who serve as district
commanders and made no mention of a pay differential for captains who serve as
special unit commanders did not waiver the union's right to bargain when the
city after making these payments for 13 years, stopped differential pay to
special unit captains. Boston v. Labor Rel. Cmsn., 48 Mass.App.Ct. 169, 718
N.E.2d 875, 1999 Mass. App. Lexis 1127, 162 LRRM (BNA) 2775 (Mass App. 1999).
{N/R}
California appeals panel holds that a bargaining
agreement may be modified orally, even if it provides that all modifications
must be in writing. Mechanical v. Greater, 1998 Cal.App. Lexis 764, 66
Cal.App.4th 672, 78 Cal.Rptr.2d 225, comparing Certified v. Haw. Teamsters, 597
F.2d 1269 (9th Cir. 1979) and Martinsville v. NLRB, 969 F.2d 1263 (D.C.Cir.
1992). See also Conrail v. Rlwy. Labor, 491 U.S. 299 (1989). [1999 FP 4-5]
Maryland's highest court upholds a Governor's
Executive Order mandating collective bargaining with state employees.
McCullough v. Glendening, 347 Md. 272, 701 A.2d 99, 1997 Md. Lexis 504. [1998
FP 35]
Fourth Circuit rules that nurses are
"supervisors" and cannot form a collective bargaining unit. Glenmark
Associates v. NLRB, #97-1403, 147 F.3d 333, 1998 U.S. App. Lexis 13142, 158
LRRM (BNA) 2582 (4th Cir. 1998). Also see: Harborside Healthcare and Teamsters
L-20, #8-RC-15774, 330 N.L.R.B. 1334, 2000 NLRB Lexis 244, 164 LRRM (BNA) 116
(NLRB 2000) and "Physicians, nurses & housestaff: the continuing
struggle for collective bargaining rights," 33 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 107
(1999). {N/R}
Arbitrator upholds, in general, provisions
contained in an informal agreement. "In cases where the parties meet
informally and reach agreement on a variance in the Agreement, such is
typically binding on both parties." Intern. Paper (Hamilton) and United
Paperworkers L-1968, AAA Case #52-300-00102-97, 110 LA (BNA) 250 (2-11-1998).
{N/R}
National Labor Relations Board allows multiunion
joint representation with; (1) a single chief spokesperson during collective
bargaining negotiations; (2) the exchange of only joint proposals; (3) the
creation of a single bargaining agenda; (4) the preparation of a single
agreement signed by each member of the joint representative; (5) the
application of the agreement's provisions to all un member of the joint
representative. International Paper, 325 N.L.R.B. 689 at 691-2 (1998); see also
NLRB v. National Truck Rental, 239 F.2d 422/fn.7 (D.C. Cir. 1956). {N/R}
Labor contract between city and police assn.
which had no fixed duration was automatically cancelled when union rejected the
city's final offer during negotiation sessions. City of El Cajon and
E.C.P.O.A., 1996 Cal.App. Lexis 856, 96 DAR 11137. {N/R}
Federal appeals court strikes down a collective
bargaining provision that awarded attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party.
Moore v. L-569 IBEW, 1995 U.S.App. Lexis 10088 (9th Cir.). [1995 FP 116-7]
Iowa rules that the payment by the employer of
punitive damages assessed against police officers is a mandatory subject of
bargaining. Waterloo Police Prot. Assn. v. P.E.R.B., 497 N.W.2d 833 (Iowa
1993). [1994 FP 36-7]
A police board’s statutory power to determine
cause for dismissal and terminate an employee cannot be abrogated by a
collective bargaining agreement. The Illinois Public Labor Relations Act
provides that a public employer must bargain over conditions of employment “not
specifically provided for in any other law or not specifically in violation of the
provisions in other laws.” Ill.Rev.Stat. Ch.48, § 1607, Sec. 7. Parisi v.
Jenkins, 603 N.E.2d 566, 236 Ill.App.3d 42, 1992 Ill.App. Lexis 1318 (at 8).
{N/R}
City could not later contest the legality of a
contract provision it agreed to during negotiations. Upper Chichester Twp. v.
Penna. Labor Rel. Bd., 621 A.2d 1134 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1993). [1993 FP 164-5]
House Bill would have protected public employees
during municipal bankruptcies. H.R. 3949, the "Municipal Employee
Protection Amendments of 1991." 30 (1476) G.E.R.R. (BNA) 1092. [1992 FP
148]
Federal appeals court holds that a majority of
the employees of a combined bargaining unit formed by a merger can decide
seniority and promotional protocols, even if it displaces the ranking of some
employees. Rakestraw v. United Airlines, 981 F.2d 1524 (7th Cir. 1992), relying
on Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 73 S.Ct. 681 (1953). [1993 FP 118]
Union president could not agree to contract
modification without approval of his membership or board of directors. Harrison
v. City of San Antonio, 695 S.W.2d 271 (Tex.App. 1985).
Illinois appellate court invalidates multi-year
contracts; funds must be appropriated annually and in advance. Ligenza v. Vil.
of Round Lake Beach, 478 N.E.2d 1187 (Ill.App. 1985).
Press and public are not entitled to attend
bargaining sessions; open meetings laws do not apply. Co. of Saratoga v.
Newman, 476 N.Y.S.2d 1020 (Misc. 1984).
City has inherent power to enter into contract
with union, absent a state law to the contrary; parity provision upheld. Local
598, Council 58 American Federation v. City of Huntington, W. Va., 317 S.W.2d
167 (W. Va. 1984); Dayton Teachers Assn. v. Bd. of Educ., 41 Ohio St. 2d 127,
323 N.E.2d 714.
State bargaining laws may include firefighters
and exclude police officers; no equal protection violation. Beverlin v. Bd. of
Police Cmsnrs. of Kansas City, 722 F.2d 395 (8th Cir. 1983).
Person with authority to negotiate must also have
the power to approve the contract before it will be enforced. Firefighters
L-642 v. City of Fargo, 321 N.W.2d 473 (N.D. 1982).
Bargaining agreement might infringe on
constitutional powers of a common law sheriff. Wisconsin Prof. Police Assn. v.
County of Dane, 106 Wis. 2d 303, 316 N.W.2d 656 (1982).
State bargaining law prevails over city's home
rule charter and ordinance provisions. City of La Grande v. La Grande Police
Assn., 639 P.2d 661 (Ore. App. 1982).
Bargaining agreement can substitute seniority
over other methods for promoting employees; local laws in conflict will not be
enforced. L-1383 IAFF v. City of Warren Pol. and Fire Civ. Serv. Cmsn., 311
N.W.2d 702 (Mich. 1981).
No equal protection violation for city to
negotiate contract with non public safety employees, but to refuse to bargain
with safety workers. Naperville Police Union v. City of Naperville, 422 N.E.2d
869 (Ill.App. 1981).
New Jersey police union could not hire Teamsters
to be their bargaining representative; state law prohibits police unions from
including other public employees. City of Camden and Camden Police Super. Off.
Assn., Case #81-139, Docket #C-81-41-90 N.J. Public Emplmnt. Rltns. Cmsn.,
G.E.R.R. 930:23. [#92 FP 6]
Washington supreme court upholds law that
excludes small entities from collective bargaining act. Yakima Co. Deputy
Sheriff's Assn. v. Bd. of Cmsnrs., 92 Wash.2d 831, 601 P.2d 537; cert. den. 100
S.Ct. 2958 (1980).
Non-civil service deputy sheriffs cannot be
included under state public employment relations acts. Murphy v. Mack, 358
So.2d 822 (Fla. 1978).
Prior contract with former sheriff not
enforceable. Reese v. Lombard, 400 N.Y.S.2d 662 (A.D. 1977).
Contract cannot deprive employee of vested rights
created by statute; rights need not be specifically reserved in agreement. L-400
Chester City Fire Fighters Assn. v. Nacrelli, 373 A.2d 472 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1977).
Equal Protection Clause argument fails to
persuade a three-judge federal court to order police officers to be included
within the coverage of a state. A state or municipal government may not
prohibit police officers from joining a union, but is under no obligation to
recognize it for bargaining purposes, even though it does so for other
classifications of public employees. Vorbeck v. McNeal, 407 F.Supp. 733 (E.D.
Mo. 1976); cert. den. 96 S.Ct. 3160.
A city's post-strike agreement with the police
union was enforceable, even though there was no "consideration" for
the contract. Crowley v. San Francisco, 64 Cal.App.3d 450, 1976 Cal.App. Lexis
2088, 134 Cal.Rptr. 533. {N/R}
Oklahoma firefighters receive setback by state
supreme court; state collective bargaining act is only "advisory."
Midwest City v. Cravens, 532 P.2d 829 (Okla. 1975).
Kentucky court has no authority to order
Lexington-Fayette County to recognize IAFF - throws burden back to local
government. Lexington-Fayette Urban Co. Gov't v. IAFF Local 526, #74-2091,
Fayette Co. Cir. Ct. (Ky. 1975).
Finality of election between statutes. Fraternal
Order of Police v. Shapp, 548 A.2d 502 (Pa.Cmwlth. 1975).
See also: Arbitration Procedures;
Coll. Brg. - Duty to Bargain; Staffing
Requirements; Past Practices Clause; Reductions in Force.