PLEASE COPY TO SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS AND ADMINISTRATORS AS NEEDED
**School Board Cases
VOL. XXVII . . . . . . . . . . . May 28, 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . NO. 18
CA-2003-032; Order 03GC-120 (May 21, 2003)
CA-2003-033; Order 03GC-121 (May 21, 2003)
RC-2003-026; Order 03E-122 (May 22, 2003)
CA-2003-032; Order 03GC-120 (May 21, 2003)
NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF FIREMEN & OILERS, SEIU, NCFO, LOCAL 1227, AFL-CIO, CLC, Charging Party,
v.
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, Respondent.
The General Counsel summarily dismisses the charge that the employer violated the Act by unilaterally altering a pay for for performance evaluation form.
"Pursuant to contract articles, the City is granted the unilateral authority to develop a performance evaluation form. This evaluation form is to be used to evaluate employees for the purpose of merit raises. I have found sufficient that portion of Local 1227's charge alleging that the City failed to comply with the contracts by not completing preliminary performance evaluations of its employees by February 1, 2003. However, I conclude that the City has otherwise complied with the contracts and not discriminated against Local 1227 bargaining unit members."
CA-2003-033; Order 03GC-121 (May 21, 2003)
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1395, AFL-CIO, Charging Party,
v.
GENERAL COUNSEL'S SUMMARY DISMISSAL ESCAMBIA COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Respondent.
The General Counsel summarily dismisses the charge that the employer violated the Act by disciplined two employees for wearing small buttons at work that read "Proud to be ATU."
"I need not reach the merits of the charge because the ATU also states that it has grieved the discipline pursuant to its contract. Section 447.401, Florida Statutes (2002), prohibits the processing of an unfair labor practice charge where the charging party is already processing a contract grievance over the same issue. If no substantial action has been taken on the grievance, it may be withdrawn and the instant charge re-filed."
RC-2003-026; Order 03E-122 (May 22, 2003)
GOVERNMENT SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF FLORIDA, OFFICE & PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 100, AFL-CIO, Petitioner,
v.
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, Respondent.
PERC finds the petition sufficient, approves the consent election agreement and orders a secret ballot election for a unit comprised of: "Accountant I, accounts payable technician, administrative assistant, administrative secretary, citizen aide representative, collection manager, communication receptionist, communication specialist, community outreach coordinator, community relations board coordinator, department head secretary, dispatcher, dispatcher supervisor, grants/contracts administrator, MIS specialist, occupational license coordinator, park supervisor, payroll technician, permit coordinator, planner, principal planner, purchasing agent, records clerk, recreation leader, recreation supervisor, senior site manager, and social services manager."
[ From Attorney General's Appellate Alert]
"Employment dispute - removal to federal court... A dispute involving federal labor law may be transferred from state court to federal court even though it could become prohibitively expensive for workers to pursue smaller claims, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a Florida case.
The court unanimously ruled against Phillip Breuer, a Brevard County construction worker who sued his former employer for unpaid wages, liquidated damages, interest and fees. Breuer filed the suit in state court under a provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act that says an action to recover "may be maintained ... in any Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction." The construction company removed the case to federal court, but Breuer sought to have it returned to the Florida court system. Both the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court concluded that the federal law does not expressly bar removal in direct, unequivocal language, and therefore the company was within its legal rights in removing the case to federal court.
"It is ... (a) concern about consequences that leaves us with fatal reservations about Breuer's
pragmatic appeal that many claims under the FLSA are for such small amounts
that removal to a sometimes distant federal court may make it less convenient
and more expensive for employees to vindicate their rights effectively. This may often be true, but even if its
truth somehow justified winking at the ambiguity of the term 'maintain,' the
implications would keep us from going Breuer's way. ... (Breuer) cannot have a
removal exception for the FLSA without entailing exceptions for other statutory
actions, to the point that it becomes just too hard to believe that a right to
'maintain' an action was ever meant to displace the right to remove,"
Justice Souter wrote for the court.
[Breuer v. Jim's Concrete of Brevard, Inc., 5/19/03]"
"Improper state actions stemming from agency merger... The 1st DCA, concluding that a state agency erred in a ruling against a police union, gave the state and the union 60 days to resolve their dispute or deal with the disruptive impact of returning to work schedules abandoned two years ago.
The case arose from the creation of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the merger of law enforcement units from two combined agencies. After some limited negotiations, the state Department of Management Services unilaterally changed the work schedules of unionized law enforcement officers, prompting the union to file an unfair labor charge against the state. A hearing officer agreed with the union and recommended a return to the status quo ante, or work schedules in place before the change. The Public Employees Relations Commission entered a final order that did not order a return to the prior schedules, and the union appealed. On appeal, PERC argued that a change to the prior schedules would be disruptive. The 1st DCA sided with the union, but ordered the union and DMS to negotiate in hopes of avoiding the disruption that would be caused by a return to two-year-old work schedules. If a negotiated settlement cannot be reached within the 60-day period, work schedules must be returned to their status as of May 2001, the DCA said.
"(W)e cannot condone (DMS') position in this appeal that, in essence, asks for an affirmance because
of the very consequences attendant to its unfair labor practice. Not to require a return to the status quo
ante would be akin to rewarding (DMS) for an unlawful act and would leave (the
union) impotent under PERC's rather bland final order. Simply put, PERC abused its discretion by
not following the ALJ's recommendation that the parties be returned to the status
quo ante on the facts presented in this appeal," the court said.
"(DMS') concern for disruption could have best been handled by following
recognized collective bargaining principles. The detrimental effect caused by unlawful action cannot be used as a
shield to avoid imposition of the appropriate remedy."
[International Union of Police Associations
v. Department of Management Services, 5/20/03]"
CITATION DISCLAIMER - This summary should not be cited. For that purpose, the cases may be acquired by contacting FSLRS, PERC, FEN district representatives, FPELRA representatives, jurisdiction labor relations officers or their attorneys for particular cases.
Publications on this site are designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to public employee labor relations and collective bargaining. This information is provided with the understanding that FSLRS is not engaged in rendering legal service. If legal advice or assistance is required, contact your attorney.
This site maintained for educational organizations by
The Florida School Labor Relations Service
a Joint Venture of the
Florida School Boards Association
and the
Florida Association of District School Superintendents
for the
Florida Educational Negotiators
Suggestions, critique and e-mail to FSLRS