December 2008

Detroit Public Schools
– and – Organization of School Administrators and Supervisors
– and – Latricia A. Perry

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party’s Claim Against Respondents Dismissed as Untimely Under PERA Six-Month Statute of Limitations; ALJ Ordered Charging Party to Show Cause Why Claim Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to State a Claim; Charging Party’s Response Revealed That Charging Party Became Aware of Alleged Unfair Practice in 2007; Charge Brought in 2008 Barred by Statute of Limitations.

City of Detroit
– and – Detroit Police Officers Association

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party’s Claim Barred by PERA’s Six Month Statute of Limitations; In a Charge Involving a Unilateral Change in Terms and Conditions of Employment, Statute of Limitation Runs From Date Employer Announces the Change: Charge filed in February 2008, based on Employer’s Unilateral Change in Mandatory Subject of Bargaining in July 2006 is Barred by Statute of Limitations.  Charge based on Respondent’s filing of Counterclaim in Litigation Between the Parties does not Constitute a Continuing Violation; Charge filed more than Six-Months after Charging Party knew of Counterclaim is Untimely.

Calhoun County Medical Care Facility
– and – Service Employees International Union, Local 79
– and – Holly Anne Newman

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party Failed to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Could be Granted; Claim Barred by PERA’s Six Month Statute of Limitations; Employer Was Not Properly Served With Charge Within the Statutorily Required Six Month Period; Charge Against Union Failed to State a Claim Due to Charging Party’s Failure to Establish any Evidence That Union Acted Arbitrary, Discriminatory, or in Bad Faith While Representing Charging Party.

Wayne County (Wayne County Community Mental Health Agency), AFSCME Local 1659,
-and- Benita Jackson, Regina Hardge

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found- Charging Parties Failed to State a Claim Against Employer and Union under PERA; In a Consolidated Action, the ALJ Ordered Charging Parties to Show Cause Why Charges Should Not be Dropped For Failure to State a Claim; Charging Parties Failed to State a Claim Against Employer Under PERA, and Further Charging Parties Lacked Standing to Allege That Employer Has Bargained in Bad Faith; Charging Parties Failed to State Specific Allegations Upon Which Relief Could Be Granted Against Union, Therefore All Claims Are Dismissed.

Washington Township
–and- Michigan Association of Fire Fighters (MAFF)

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Evidence did not Support Finding that Employer Repudiated or Unilaterally Altered Grievance Procedure or Disciplinary Policy During Negotiation for First Contract; Employer has Obligation to Maintain Status Quo Pending Satisfaction of Bargaining Obligation; Although Employer Representative Misstated Law in Asserting that Previously Established Disciplinary Policy Need not be Followed During Negotiation, No Evidence of Repudiation of Just Cause Standard or Alteration of Policy or Procedure by Employer and No Violation of Duty to Bargain Found.

City of Lansing
– and – Teamsters Local 580

Unfair Labor Practice Found – Failure To Provide Charging Party With Relevant Information in a Timely Manner; Request for Non Unit Member Information, Although Not Presumptively Relevant, Was Properly Shown to be Relevant By Charging Party; Information Sought Concerning Seasoned, Temporary and Contract Employees Was Needed by Charging Party to Carry Out its Statutory Duties to Enforce the Contract and Engage in Collective Bargaining; Charging Party’s Numerous Requests and Year Long Delay for Information by Respondent Constituted Unfair Labor Practice; Must Provide Information or Explain why it Has Not Done So; Issue of Whether Employer Should be Permitted to Introduce Withheld Information to be Addressed at Time it Seeks to do so; PERA Does not Authorize Commission to Award Attorney’s Fees.

Thornapple Manor Medical Care Facility (Barry County)
- and - Michigan AFSCME Council and its Affiliated Local 2742

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Summary Disposition Granted on Whether Employer Entitled to Adopt Policy Regarding Smoking in the Workplace; Employer Satisfied Obligation to Bargain Over Policy by Negotiating Contract Language Giving it Right to Unilaterally Adopt, Revise, and Enforce Reasonable Safety and Work Rules and Allow Union to Challenge Requirements of Rules Through Grievance Procedure; Union Explicitly Waived its Right to Further Bargain Issue; No Contract Repudiation as Parties Have Bona Fide Dispute Over Reasonableness of Policy.

City of River Rouge
–and- Marvin Z. Dotson

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found –Charging Party Failed to State a Claim Against Employer under PERA; Charging Party Did Not Raise any Recognizable Issues Under PERA; Absent an Allegation that Employer Interfered With, Restrained, Coerced, or Retaliated Against Charging Party Relating To Conduct Protected by PERA, the Commission is Prohibited From Making Judgments On the Merits.

West Bloomfield Township
-and- Technical, Professional and Office workers Association of Michigan

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party’s Claim Alleging Violation in Layoff and Unilateral Transfer of Work out of Bargaining Unit Dismissed as Untimely Filed under PERA Six Month Statute of Limitations; Charging Party was Given Actual Notice of Townships’ Intent to Eliminate Parking Enforcement Position at Open Township Meetings in Early December 2005, Which Charging Party Attended; Charging Party’s Claim Filed in June 2006 was Time Barred by PERA; Even if Claimed not Time Barred it Would Still Fail to State a Claim; Charging Party Failed to Establish a Duty to Bargain Over the Transfer of Work.

City Of Farmington Hills
–and- Kurt Wissman

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found –Charging Party Failed to State a Claim Against Employer under PERA; Not all Unfair Conduct by Employer Violates PERA; Charge Dismissed on Summary Disposition as it failed to Allege that Employer’s Actions were Motivated by Union or Other Protected Activity; Absent Allegation that Employer’s Actions were Motivated by Union or Other Protected Activities, Commission is Prohibited from Making a Determination on Merits or Fairness of Charging Party’s Discharge.

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 26
-and- Paul Hill

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party Failed to Include Factual Allegations Supporting the Claim that Respondent Violated its Statutory Duties; Charging Party failed to Respond to ALJ Order for More Definite Statement; Charge Dismissed for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Under PERA. Charging Party Claim Filed Nine Months After Claim Accrued; Charging Party Failed to Respond to ALJ Order to Show Cause Why Charge Should Not Be Dismissed as Barred by PERA Six Month Statute of Limitations; Charge Dismissed as Untimely Filed.

Teamsters Local 214
-and- Wayne D. Bernard

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charge Dismissed for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Under PERA; Charging Party’s Expressions of Disagreement with Union’s Settlement of Grievance Do Not State a Claim of a Breach of Respondent’s Duty of Fair Representation;  Charging Party Failed to Allege Facts Indicating that Respondent’s Actions were Arbitrary, Discriminatory or in Bad Faith.  Charge Also Dismissed as Untimely Filed; Charging Party Failed to Respond to ALJ Order to Show Cause Why Charge Should Not Be Dismissed as Barred by PERA Six Month Statute of Limitations.

Michigan State University
– and – Michigan State University Administrative Professional Association, MEA/NEA
– and – John Moralez

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party Failed to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Could be Granted; Claim Barred by Statute of Limitations; Charge Filed Five Years After Employment Termination is Barred by PERA’s Six Month Statute of Limitations; Future Charges Against Same Respondents Based on Same Employment Relationship will be Summarily Dismissed.

Kent County
-and- UAW Local 2600

Unfair Labor Practice Found - Respondent’s Denial of Employee’s Request for Union Representation During an Investigatory Interview Violated Employee’s Rights under PERA; Employer Knew Interview could Lead to Employee’s Discipline or Discharge but Repeatedly Responded Negatively to Employee’s Queries as to Whether Union Representation was Needed, Employee was Discharged as a Result of the Incriminating Information She Disclosed While Unrepresented During the Investigatory Interview; Make-Whole Remedy of Reinstatement Appropriate Because Employer’s Actions in Repeatedly Denying Employee’s Request for Union Representation were Particularly Egregious and Employee was Discharged Based on the Conduct that was the Subject of the Investigatory Interview.

Michigan State Government
Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth
Bureau of Employment Relations

This page last updated 02/25/08