April 2018

Decision on Remand:  Record Devoid of Evidence Establishing that Respondent Discriminated or Retailed Against Charging Party as a Result of Filing an Earlier Unfair Labor Practice Charge; Charging Party Did Not Amend His Original Charge to Add Allegations Regarding the Denial of His Nomination to Hold Union Office; Even if Charging Party Amended His Charge, the Denial Occurred More Than a Month After the Instant Charge was Filed and Could Not Have Been the Occurrence Upon Which His Initial Charge was Based.  

Macomb County Clerk -and- International Union, UAW Region 1, Local 412

Respondent’s Motion for a Retroactive Extension of Time Denied: Respondent Failed to Show Good Cause for Untimely Filing of Exceptions; A Party’s Failure to Personally Receive the ALJ’s Decision by Mail Is Not Good Cause for Failing to Timely File Exceptions if the Party’s Representative Timely Received the ALJ’s Decision; A Party’s Mistake as to the Deadline for Filing Exceptions Not Good Cause for a Retroactive Extension of Time; Being Busy is Not Good Cause for Failing to Timely File Exceptions Where There is No Showing That the Activities That Caused the Party to Be Busy Were Unforeseen and Actually Prevented the Filing of Either the Exceptions or a Motion for an Extension of Time Prior to the Exceptions Deadline.

Unfair Labor Practice Found: Unions Violated §10(2)(a) by Demanding That Charging Party Pay Agency Fees after He Resigned from Union Membership; In the Absence of a Lawful Union Security Clause, Demanding That a Former Union Member Pay Agency Fees Unlawfully Restrains or Coerces That Employee in the Exercise of His § 9 Right to Refrain from Financially Supporting a Union; Union’s Intent in Attempting to Enforce the Union Security Clause Immaterial in Determining Whether the Union Violated the Employee’s § 9 Rights; Union Security Provision in the Union’s Collective Bargaining Agreement with Charging Parties’ Employer Did Not Condition Charging Parties’ Continued Employment on Payment of Agency Fees and Therefore Did Not Violate §10(3); Union Security Provision Was Not Lawful under §10(5) Because It Did Not Violate §10(3).

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: The Employer Had No Duty to Bargain over its Decision to Change the Attendance Policy Because the Employer’s Right to Make That Change Was Covered by the Parties' Contract; The Employer Would Have Had a Duty to Bargain Over the Effects of the Change if the Union Had Made an Explicit Bargaining Demand Identifying Specific Issues over Which It Wanted to Bargain; Since the Union Failed to Make Such a Demand, the Employer Had No Duty to Bargain.

C17 J-078

(no exceptions)

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Employer’s Memo to Bargaining Unit Members Advising Them That it Would Comply With Union’s Request For Information Regarding Wages and Benefits Received By Individual Bargaining Unit Members Did Not Constitute Direct Dealing in Violation of § 10(1)(b); The Employer’s Memo Stated That it Was Legally Required to the Information and Did Not Cross the Line Between a Noncoercive Expression of Opinion and a Direct Attempt to Bargain With Unit Members.  

C17 K-097

(no exceptions)

Unfair Labor Practice Found: Union Violated § 10(2)(a) by Demanding That Charging Parties Pay an Agency Fee after They Resigned Their Union Memberships; Demanding That a Public Employee Pay an Agency Fee Unlawfully Restrains or Coerces That Employee in the Exercise of His or Her § 9 Right to Refrain from Financially Supporting a Labor Organization; Union Security Provision in the Union's Collective Bargaining Agreement Did Not Condition Charging Parties' Continued Employment on Payment of Agency Fees and Therefore Did Not Violate § 10(3); Union Security Provision Was Not Lawful under § 10(5) Because it Did Not Violate § 10(3).

Right to Work; Union Security Agreement; § 10(5); § 10(3)

Oakland County, Water Resources Commission -and- Oakland County Employees Union

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Respondent Gave Charging Party Notice, on Multiple Occasions, of its Intent to Outsource the Pontiac Water Replacement Program Prior to its Actual Implementation in August of 2016; Union Must Request Bargaining as Soon as it Learns that the Employer is Considering a Change in Terms and Conditions of Employment; Charging Party Waived its Right to Bargain by Failing to Make a Timely Demand After Receiving Notice of the County’s Intent to Subcontract. 

C17 J-082

(no exceptions)

Wayne County Community College District       -and- Karen Green

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charging Party’s Claims that Respondent’s Refusal to Reclassify Her or Pay Her a Higher Wage Constituted Discrimination Based on Her Sex are Not Valid PERA Claims; Absent a Valid Claim Under PERA, the Commission Lacks Jurisdiction; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order May Warrant Dismissal of Charge. 

C17 K-103

(no exceptions)