Name |
Subject Matter |
Date Issued |
Case Number |
Topic(s) |
Wayne County Community College District -and- Professional & Administrative Association, Local 4467, AFT Michigan, AFT -and- Joseph G. Leavell, Sr.
|
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charging Party Failed to State a Valid PERA Claim; A Claim Alleging Repudiation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement by a Public Employer Can Only be Brought by the Labor Organization which is a Party to that Contract, not an Individual Member of the Bargaining Unit; Charging Party Failed to State Facts to Establish that the Employer Harbored Anti-Union Animus or Hostility When it Initiated a Sexual Harassment Investigation; Charging Party Failed to Allege Material Facts to Indicate a Breach of Duty of Fair Representation; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order May Warrant Dismissal of Charge.
|
8/24/17 |
C17 C-025 & CU17 C-006
(no exceptions)
|
Failure to State Claim; Anti-Union Animus; Duty of Fair Representation; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order |
Detroit Transportation Corporation-and- Police Officers Labor Council -and- Derek Turner
|
Charge Against Union Withdrawn: Charging Party Failed to State a Valid PERA Claim; Charging Party Does Not Have Standing to Allege that Employer Violated PERA by Refusing to Discuss a Grievance with His Bargaining Agent; Employer’s Duty to Bargain is Owed to Bargaining Agent, and Only the Bargaining Agent Can File a Charge Alleging a Violation of Section 10(1)(e); Commission Lacks Jurisdiction to Address Claim that an Individual was Denied Constitutional Right to Due Process.
|
8/24/17 |
C17 D-034 & CU17 D-015
(no exceptions)
|
Failure to State Claim; Standing; Commission Jurisdiction
|
Grand Traverse Co & Grand Traverse Co Sheriff -and- Police Officers Association of Michigan (Deputies Unit) -and- Police Officers Association of Michigan (Corrections Unit) -and- Command Officers Association of Michigan (Sergeants Unit) -and- Technical, Professional and Officeworkers Association of Michigan (Clerical Unit)
|
Unfair Labor Practice Found: Employers Breached Duty to Bargain by Increasing the Employees' Share of Health Insurance Premium Costs from 6% Specified in the Collective Bargaining Agreements to 20% during the Term of the Agreements; A Public Employer's Choice of Medical Benefit Plan Cost-Sharing Options under Act 152 a Permissive Subject of Bargaining; Employers Have an Obligation to Choose a Medical Benefit Plan Cost Sharing Option under Act 152 That is Consistent with Their Obligation to Pay Medical Benefit Plan Costs under the Terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement; Both Parties to a Collective Bargaining Agreement Bound by the Terms of That Agreement for its Duration Unless They Mutually Agree to Modify its Terms.
|
8/16/17 |
C16 E-050,
C16 E-051,
C16 E-052,
C16 E-053
|
Duty to Bargain; Repudiation; Act 152 |
City of Detroit (Department of Water and Sewerage) -and- Association of Municipal Engineers
|
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Untimely Filed Three Years After Respondent’s Alleged Unilateral Imposition of a Reduction in Wages and Benefits; Commission Has Strict Six Month Statute of Limitations Period Which is Not Tolled by the Pursuit of Other Remedies; The Issue of Whether or not an Order of the United States District Court Prohibited Charging Party from Filing an Unfair Labor Practice Charge was Not Raised Until Charging Party Filed Exceptions to the ALJ’s Decision; Commission Does Not Consider New Issues Not Raised Before an ALJ.
|
8/16/17 |
C16 F-069
|
Statute of Limitations; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order; Issue Raised for First Time Before Commission |
Wayne County -and- AFSCME Council 25, Local 3317 |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Union Failed to Establish that County Did Not Come to Bargaining Table with an Open Mind and Sincere Desire to Reach Agreement, or that the County’s Conduct Throughout Negotiations Violated its Duty to Bargain in Good Faith; County’s Continual Placement of Pension Changes in its Proposals in Spite of the Language in the Agreement Not Indicative of Bad-Faith Bargaining; No Merit to Union’s Allegation of Direct Dealing Against the County; County Complied with Union’s Request for Information it Requested to Support its Bargaining Position; Since Charging Party Failed to Establish a Valid PERA Claim, No Need to Analyze Charging Party’s Claim of Boulwarism.
|
8/11/17 |
C14 G-079
(no exceptions)
|
Duty to Bargain in Good Faith; Surface Bargaining; Direct Dealing; Request for Information; Boulwarism
|