June 2009

Lake County and Lake County Sheriff
-and- Police Officers Association of Michigan

Unfair Labor Practice Found - Respondents’ Refusal to Proceed to Arbitration on a Grievance that is Arguably Arbitrable Violates the Duty to Bargain in Good Faith; Respondents had No Duty to Arbitrate Grievance under Expired Contract; Grievance is Arguably Arbitrable under New Contract in which the Effective Date Precedes the Date of the Grievance. Respondent’s Refusal to Arbitrate the Grievance is a Violation of PERA.  Determination of Whether a Grievance is Actually Arbitrable is Properly Addressed by the Arbitrator or the Courts.

City of Bay City
-and- Utility Workers of America, Local 542

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Where the Parties’ Underlying Dispute is Resolved Before the Legal Issues can be Decided in the Legal Forum, the Defense of Mootness may Preempt the Finding of an Unfair Labor Practice; Because the Parties Reached an Agreement Resolving the Conflict which Gave Rise to this Matter After the Close of the Record, the Dispute is Rendered Moot and Dismissal of the Unfair Labor Practice Charge is Warranted.

Van Buren County and Van Buren County Sheriff – and – Police Officers Association of Michigan

Decision and Recommended Order Vacated – Parties Settled Dispute Before ALJ’s Decision and Recommended Order was Issued; Charging Party Acknowledged its Error in Failing to Give ALJ Timely Notice of the Settlement and its Request to Withdraw the Charge; Respondent Requested that ALJ’s Decision and Recommended Order be Vacated; Position of Parties Prior to Decision and Order Restored; ALJ’s Decision and Recommended Order Will not be Published

Arenac County Road Commission
-and- Teamsters Local 214

Unfair Labor Practice Found - An Employer’s Unilateral Change of Terms and Conditions of Employment Constitutes an Unfair Labor Practice, Even When the Change Operates to the Benefit of Employees; Respondent’s Unilateral Implementation of New Health Care Plan Without Charging Party’s Agreement Constituted a Circumvention of Respondent’s Duty to Bargain under PERA, Despite the Cost Savings to Employees.  Although a Union May Enter into a Contractual Waiver of its Right to Bargain over a Mandatory Subject of Bargaining, the Waiver Must be Clear and Unmistakable; Management Rights Language of a Contract that Gives an Employer the Right to Establish or Change Rules Does Not Constitute a Clear and Explicit Waiver of the Union’s Right to Bargain over Disciplinary Policies; Respondent Violated its Duty to Bargain by Unilaterally Implementing New Disciplinary Policies Without Giving Charging Party an Opportunity to Negotiate the Terms.

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found - Although an Employer Must Maintain Existing Conditions of Employment after the Parties’ Contract Expires, a Single Departure from Past Practice Does Not Always Indicate that the Employer has Altered Working Conditions; Respondent’s Retention of One Temporary Employee to Perform Bargaining Unit Work was an Isolated Incident that Did Not Demonstrate that Respondent Altered its Policy with Respect to the Employment of Temporary Employees in Violation of its Bargaining Obligation.

Teamsters Local 214
– and – Ronald Cook

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Union has Considerable Discretion to Decide how or Whether to Proceed With a Grievance; Union is Not Required to Follow Dictates of Individual Grievant, but Rather May Investigate and Present Case in Manner it Determines to be Best; Fact an Individual Member is Dissatisfied with Union’s Efforts or Ultimate Decision is Insufficient to Constitute a Breach of the Duty of Fair Representation; Claim Also Barred by Six Month Statute of Limitation; Issue of Whether Union Officials Should be Subjected to Term Limitations is an Internal Matter Outside the Scope of PERA.

Clinton Township Firefighters Association –and – Daniel R. Funkhouser

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Failed to Meet Minimum Pleading Requirements; Charge Failed to Assert a Breach of Duty of Fair Representation by Respondent; Member Dissatisfaction with Union’s Efforts or Ultimate Decision is Insufficient to Constitute a Proper Charge of 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.

Unfair Labor Practice Not Found: Charge Fails to State a Claim Under PERA; Charge Failed to Assert that Employer Took Adverse Action Against Charging Party for Engaging in Protected Concerted Activities; Charge Failed to Assert a Breach of Duty of Fair Representation by Union.  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.

Michigan State Government
Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs
Bureau of Employment Relations

This page last updated 7/09/12