November 2019

Detroit Public Schools Community District -and- Alfred Fields, JR.

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charging Party Failed to Allege That His Suspension or Discharge Constituted Retaliation Against Him for Engaging in any PERA Protected Activity; Respondent Did Not Interfere with Charging Party’s § 9 Rights by Failing to Inform Him Who Had Been Assigned as His Union Representative, as Charging Party Never Inquired Regarding the Same; Allegation That Respondent Violated PERA by Failing to Provide Him with Union Representation at an Investigatory Meeting Untimely; Commission has Strict Six Month Statue of Limitations Period; Even if Charge were Timely Filed, Charging Party Did Not Request Union Representation and, Therefore, Respondent Had No Obligation to Provide it. 

C18 K-104

(no exceptions)

Failure to State Claim; Statute of Limitations; Weingarten Rights

UAW Local 1796 -and- Salathiel Thomas

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charging Party’s Claim That Respondent Should Have Acted Quicker in Assisting Her With a Reasonable Accommodation Request is Outside the Scope of PERA; Commission Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over Claims Regarding the Americans With Disabilities Act; Charging Party Failed to Allege That She Asked That a Grievance be Filed; A Union Does Not Owe an Employee a Duty Under PERA to Pursue a Grievance Unless the Employee Requests That the Union File One on Their Behalf. 

19-G-1467-CU

(no exceptions)

Failure to State Claim; Commission Jurisdiction

Interurban Transit Partnership -and- Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 836 -and- Donnell Harvey

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Against Employer Untimely Filed With Respect to Charging Party’s Terminations; Commission Has Strict Six-Month Statue of Limitations Period; Charging Party’s Claim That His Second Termination Violated His Procedural Rights Under the CBA Failed to State a Valid PERA Claim; Commission Lacks Jurisdiction to Address an Employee's Claim Regarding Denial of Constitutional Right to Due Process; Charging Party Did Not Establish That Anti-Union Animus Motivated Either of His Two Terminations; Union Made a Good Faith Decision to Withdraw its Demand to Arbitrate Charging Party’s Termination Grievanceve.

C18 K-109 & CU18 K-039

(no exceptions)

City of Grayling -and- Alan H. Somero

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charging Party Failed to Establish a Prima Facie Case Under § 10(1)(c) Because He Failed to Establish Anti-Union Animus as it Related to Respondent’s Actions; Record Established That Respondent Was Having Issues With Charging Party’s Work Performance When it Assessed Him a Letter of Reprimand and Later Discharged Him; Respondent’s Decision to Refer Charging Party For a Fitness For Duty Evaluation After His Reinstatement and His Subsequent Release From Employment, Were Not Arbitrary or Made in Bad Faith; After Being Found Unfit for Duty as a Result of a Psychological Evaluation, the Employer Provided a Legitimate, Non-Discriminatory Reason for Charging Party’s Release From Employment and Did Not Violate PERA in Doing so.   

C17 F-059

(no exceptions)