The web Browser you are currently using is unsupported, and some features of this site may not work as intended. Please update to a modern browser such as Chrome, Firefox or Edge to experience all features Michigan.gov has to offer.
July 2009
Name | Subject Matter | Date Issued | Case Number | Topic(s) |
City of Grand Rapids -and- Grand Rapids Employees Independent Union |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Duty to Bargain not Violated; Respondent had No Duty to Bargain Over its Decision to Outsource Bargaining Unit Work To Unpaid Volunteers; No Showing that the Reassignment of Work from Bargaining Unit Employees to Unpaid Volunteers had a Significant Adverse Impact on the Employees or that the Reassignment was Based on Costs. Respondent had no duty to Disclose requested information which was not Relevant to Union’s Duty to Collectively Bargain and Police Administration of Contract; Information Concerning Employees Outside of the Bargaining Unit is Not Presumptively Relevant. Respondent had No Duty to Bargain over Legitimate Departmental Reorganization. Respondent had no Duty to Bargain Over the Impact of its Reorganization Decision on Employees Absent a Demand to Bargain by Charging Party. |
7/23/09 |
C05 K-283 |
Duty to Bargain; Reorganization; Transfer of bargaining unit work; Unpaid Volunteers. Information Request; Presumptively relevant |
City of Detroit |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Charge Against Respondents Dismissed; Charging Party Failed to Respond to Order to Show Cause; Charges Barred by the PERA Six-Month Statute of Limitations. Charging Party Failed to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Could be Granted Against Respondent Employer; Charging Party Failed to Allege Facts that Employer’s Adverse Action was Motivated by Charging Party’s Union or Other Protected Activity. Charging Party Failed to State Facts Sufficient to Establish a Breach of Union’s Fair Representation Duty; Charge does not Allege Facts which would Establish that the Union acted Arbitrarily, Discriminatorily or in Bad Faith; Fact that Individual Member is Dissatisfied with the Union’s Efforts or Ultimate Decision is Insufficient to Constitute a Breach of the Duty of Fair Representation. |
7/22/09 |
C09 C-047 & CU09 C-011 |
Failure to State a Claim; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order; Statute of Limitations; Duty of Fair Representation |
Detroit Public Schools -and- Detroit Federation of Teachers |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Charges Dismissed for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted Under PERA; Charging Party Failed to Allege Facts Indicating that Respondent Union’s Decision Not to Pursue her Grievances was Violative of its Duty of Fair Representation; Charge Failed to Allege Union’s Decision Not to Pursue Grievances was Arbitrary, Capricious, or Made in Bad Faith. Charging Party’s Claim Against Respondent Employer Failed to Allege that she was Engaged in Protected Activities for which she Faced Discrimination or Retaliation in Violation of PERA, In a Hybrid Action Alleging a Breach of the Duty of Fair Representation and a Breach of Contract Claim, the Latter Claim Cannot Prevail Absent the Success of the Former; Given the Dismissal of Charging Party’s Claim against Respondent Union, the Claim against Respondent Employer Necessarily Fails. |
7/20/09 |
C08 D-077 & CU08 D-022 |
Failure to State a Claim; Duty of Fair Representation |
City of Royal Oak |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found – Charging Party Failed to Establish Prima Facie Case of Unlawful Discrimination; Charging Party Failed to Produce Evidence that Employer’s Adverse Action was Motivated by Charging Party’s Union or Other Protected Activity; Suspensions and Termination of Charging Party, That Occurred Months After Charging Party Filed Internal Grievances, Do Not Demonstrate Employer Retaliated Against Charging Party’s Protected Activities. |
7/17/09 |
C07 F-139 | Discrimination because of protected concerted activity |
Detroit Public Schools –and- Association of Educational Office Employees |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charges Failed to State Claims Upon Which Relief can be Granted Under PERA; Charge Against Employer Failed to Allege Facts Indicating that Employer Was Motivated by Union or Other Activity Protected by PERA; Charge regarding Matter that Occurred More than Six Months Before Filing is Barred by the Statute of Limitations; Dismissal is Required When Charge is not Timely or Properly Served. Charge Against Union Failed to Allege Facts Indicating Malice or Improper Motive by Union; Union Does not Breach Duty of Fair Representation by Delay in Processing Grievances, if Delay Does not Cause Grievance to be Denied; Charging Party’s Dissatisfaction with Union’s Efforts is Insufficient Basis for a Charge. Charging Party’s Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order Warrants Dismissal. |
7/08/09 |
C09 D-053 & CU09 D-013 |
Failure to State a Claim; Statute of Limitations; Duty of Fair Representation |
Wayne County |
Unfair Labor Practice Found - Information about Discipline Imposed on a Union’s Members Over a Period of Time is Presumptively Relevant and Will Be Ordered Disclosed Unless the Employer Rebuts the Presumption; PERA Prevails Over Statutes or Employer Policies that Purportedly Curtail an Employer’s Duty to Disclose Relevant Information; Absent a Showing of a Legitimate Interest in Keeping the Requested Information from Charging Party, Respondent’s Refusal to Disclose Disciplinary Records for Bargaining Unit Members is a Violation of its Bargaining Obligation under PERA. |
7/08/09 |
C09 C-001 |
Duty to Bargain; Information Request; Presumptively Relevant |
Detroit Public Schools –and- Detroit Federation of Teachers |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Against Employer Barred By PERA’s Strict Six Month Statute of Limitations; Charges Fail to State a Claim Under PERA; Charge Failed to Assert that Employer Interfered with, Restrained, and/or Coerced Charging Party from Engaging in Protected Concerted Activities; Charge Failed to Assert a Breach of Duty of Fair Representation That Union Acted Arbitrarily, Discriminatorily or in Bad Faith; Fact that Individual Member is Dissatisfied with Union’s Efforts or Ultimate Decision is Insufficient to Constitute a Breach of the Duty of Fair Representation; Charging Party was Ordered to Provide More Definite Statement and Show Cause Why Charge Should not be Dismissed; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order Warrants Dismissal of Charge. |
7/07/09 |
C09 B-005 & CU09 B-003 |
Failure to State a Claim; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order; Statute of Limitations; Duty of Fair Representation |
Detroit Public Schools –and- Detroit Federation of Teachers |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Fails to State a Claim Under PERA; Charge Failed to Assert that Employer Interfered with, Restrained, and/or Coerced Charging Party from Engaging in Protected Concerted Activities; Charge Failed to Assert a Breach of Duty of Fair Representation That Union Acted Arbitrarily, Discriminatory or in Bad Faith; Charging Party was Ordered to Provide More Definite Statement and Show Cause Why Charge Should not be Dismissed; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order Warrants Dismissal of Charge; Charges Also Barred By PERA’s Strict Six Month Statute of Limitations. |
7/07/09 |
C09 C-031 & CU09 C-008 |
Failure to State a Claim; Failure to Respond to Show Cause Order; Statute of Limitations |
Marquette Area Public Schools |
Unit Clarification Petition Granted - Unit Clarification Generally Not Appropriate Where There is an Existing Agreement Between Parties Concerning Unit Placement, or a Practice that has Become Established by Acquiescence; There is no Evidence that the Parties had an Express or Implied Agreement to Exclude the Position from Petitioner’s Unit; Position was Removed From its Previous Unit, Position Shares a Community of Interest With Petitioner’s Unit. |
7/01/09 |
UC08 C-008 |
Unit Clarification; Bargaining History; Community of interest |
Government Administrators Association -and- Lance A. Simmons |
Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Charging Party Failed to Establish that Respondent’s Decision Not to Pursue his Grievances was Made in Bad Faith, Arbitrarily, or Rooted in Animosity Toward Charging Party; The Union’s Duty is to Protect the Interests of the Entire Bargaining Unit; Union has Discretion to Determine How and Whether to Pursue a Grievance; a Union Member’s Mere Dissatisfaction with the Union’s Decision is Not Sufficient to Support a Charge. |
7/01/09 |
CU06 J-046 | Duty of Fair Representation |
Michigan State Government This page last updated 7/09/12 |