PLEASE COPY TO SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS AND ADMINISTRATORS AS NEEDED
**School Board Cases
VOL. XXVII . . . . . . . . . . . July 10, 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . NO. 22
EL-2003-033 (Relates to RC-2003-039); Order 03E-133 (June
5, 2003)
UC-2003-007; Order 03E-145 (June 24, 2003)
RC-2002-072; EL-2003-038; Order 03E-147 (June 25, 2003)
RC-2003-002; EL-2003-039; Order 03E-149 (June 25, 2003)
RC-2003-027; EL-2003-040; Order 03E-150 (June 25, 2003)
RC-2003-040; EL-2003-037; Order 03E-146 (June 25, 2003)
UC-2003-008; Order 03E-148 (June 24, 2003)
CA-2003-010; Order 03E-153 (June 26, 2003)
EL-2003-019 (Relates to RC-2002-084) (June 26, 2003)
RA-2003-006 (June 26, 2003)
RA-2003-012 (June 26, 2003)
EL-2003-020 (Relates to RC-2003-031) (June 27, 2003)
EL-2003-021 (Relates to RD-2003-002) (June 27, 2003)
RA-2003-009; Order 03E-154 (July 1, 2003)
RA-2003-010; Order 03E-155 (July 2, 2003)
CA-2003-003; Order 03U-156 (July 3, 2003)
CA-2003-039; Order 03GC-157 (July 3, 2003)
CA-2003-008; 011 (July 9, 2003)
WB-2003-002; Order 03WB-158 (July 8, 2003)
RC-2003-021; 036; Order 03E-159 (July 9, 2003)
EL-2003-033 (Relates to RC-2003-039); Order 03E-133 (June
5, 2003)
FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES COUNCIL 79, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
"The Commission orders that a secret ballot election be held in the following
unit, as soon as is practicable, including: All full-time and regular part-time
non-professional employees in the classifications of administrative assistant,
broadcast engineering technician, broadcast production/program assistant, broadcast
specialist, carpenter, child care group leader, cinematographer/videographer,
computer support specialist, electrician, engineering technician/designer, executive
secretary, financial aid officer, library technical assistant, locksmith, maintenance
mechanic, maintenance support worker, office assistant, office manager, refrigeration
mechanic, senior clerk, senior computer support specialist, senior financial
aid officer, senior fiscal assistant, senior library technical assistant, senior
secretary, and telephone systems operator; It will exclude: all persons in positions
designated with managerial, confidential, temporary or emergency status; employees
who have a supervisory conflict of interest with those that are included in
the unit; all persons paid from other personnel services (OPS) funds; all certified
law enforcement employees; all other professional; all faculty members; all
administrative and professional (A&P) employees; and all persons who are
currently represented under a certification issued by PERC."
UC-2003-007; Order 03E-145 (June 24, 2003)
OKALOOSA ISLAND FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, IAFF, LOCAL 2617, Petitioner,
v.
OKALOOSA ISLAND FIRE DISTRICT, Respondent.
PERC agrees with the hearing officer and grants Local 2617's petition requesting
modifications to the unit. Accordingly, the unit now includes, "All Basic
Firefighters, Firefighters, Firefighter/Engineers, Lieutenants, and Captains
employed by the Okaloosa Island Fire District."
RC-2002-072; EL-2003-038; Order 03E-147 (June 25, 2003)
UNITED FACULTY OF FLORIDA, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
The Commission adopts the hearing officer's recommended order, as modified
by correction of a scrivener's error, upon its conclusion that the hearing
officer's findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence and comply
with the essential requirements of law.
RC-2003-002; EL-2003-039; Order 03E-149 (June 25, 2003)
FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent,
v.
FLORIDA STATE LODGE, FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, INC., Intervenor.
PERC adopts the hearing officer's recommended order as the Commission's
order directing election, as the unit recommended is appropriate for the purpose
of collective bargaining. The Commission orders that a secret ballot election
be held as soon as practicable in the bargaining unit including: "all
sworn law enforcement officers employed by the University of Florida, Board
of Trustees certified pursuant to Chapter 943, Florida Statutes, in the following
classifications: Law enforcement officer, law enforcement corporal, law enforcement
sergeant, and law enforcement investigator."
RC-2003-027; EL-2003-040; Order 03E-150 (June 25, 2003)
FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner,
v.
GADSDEN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, Respondent.
The Commission adopts the hearing officer's recommended order and approves
the recommended unit and orders that a secret ballot election be held as soon
as is practicable.
RC-2003-040; EL-2003-037; Order 03E-146 (June 25, 2003)
FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES COUNCIL 79, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
The Commission accepts the hearing officer's recommendation, as amended
in the joint exception filed by both parties, and concludes that the proposed
unit is appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining. Accordingly, the
Commission orders that a secret ballot election be held as soon as is practicable
including all regularly scheduled full-time operational services employees.
UC-2003-008; Order 03E-148 (June 24, 2003)
LABORER'S INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, LOCAL UNION #517, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner,
v.
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, Respondent.
The Commission remands the case to the hearing officer in order to address a
motion to intervene filed by the International Union of Painters and Allied
Traders District Council 78, Local Union 1010. "Local 1010 asserts that
all the part-timers, including the riggers [that Local 517 wants included per
the original petition], should be permitted to elect their bargaining representative
rather than be included in the operational services bargaining unit through
unit clarification petitions." The hearing officer is to determine whether
to grant the motion to intervene and whether the petition should be either amended
or dismissed and re-filed as a representation petition.
CA-2003-010; Order 03E-153 (June 26, 2003)
PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CITY EMPLOYEES, INC., Charging Party,
v.
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, Respondent.
Final Order in which PERC concurs with the hearing officer's April 18,
2003, recommendations in regards to all issues that actually affect the outcome
of the case ruling in favor of the City.
EL-2003-019 (Relates to RC-2002-084) (June 26, 2003)
FLORIDA POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
A secret ballot election conducted May 20 through June 10, 2003 resulted as
follows: 54 eligible voters, 29 votes cast for Petitioner, 0 votes against participating
organization.
RA-2003-006 (June 26, 2003)
FLORIDA STATE LODGE, FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, INC., Petitioner,
v.
MONROE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, Respondent.
The Commission concludes that the petition meets the requirements of Section
447.301(1), F.S (2002) and that the proposed unit is appropriate for the purpose
of collective bargaining. Accordingly, the FOP is certified as the exclusive
representative for "all certified law enforcement officers appointed as
deputy sheriffs employed by the Monroe County Sheriff's Office including
officers assigned as bailiffs, road patrol deputies/officers, detectives, airport
security deputies/officers, inmate transportation officers, road patrol sergeants,
and detective sergeants."
RA-2003-012 (June 26, 2003)
FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY GRADUATE ASSISTANTS UNITED, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA A&M UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
The Commission concludes that the that the proposed unit is appropriate for
the purpose of collective bargaining and is certified as the exclusive collective
bargaining representative of employees included in the following bargaining
unit: all employees of the Florida A&M University Board of Trustees classified
as graduate research associate (9181), graduate research assistant (9182), graduate
teaching associate (9183), graduate teaching assistant (9184), and graduate
assistant (9185).
EL-2003-020 (Relates to RC-2003-031) (June 27, 2003)
MARY ESTHER PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, IAFF, LOCAL 4247, Petitioner,
v.
CITY OF MARY ESTHER, Respondent.
A secret ballot election conducted May 21 through June 11, 2003 resulted as
follows: 6 eligible voters, 4 votes cast for Petitioner, 0 votes against participating
organization.
EL-2003-021 (Relates to RD-2003-002) (June 27, 2003)
VICKI GORNY, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA STATE LODGE, FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, Respondent,
v.
CITY OF STUART, Intervenor.
A secret ballot election conducted May 21 through June 11, 2003 resulted as
follows: 52 eligible voters, 1 void ballot, 18 votes cast against Respondent,
14 votes cast for Respondent.
RA-2003-009; Order 03E-154 (July 1, 2003)
UNITED FACULTY OF FLORIDA, Petitioner,
v.
NEW COLLEGE OF FLORIDA, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
The Commission agrees with the hearing officer in concluding that "the
petition meets the requirements of Section 447.307(1), F.S. (2002)." They
also conclude that the proposed unit is appropriate for collective bargaining
as the board of trustees of each university in the State University System is
the public employer of the employees of that university for such purposes. "Accordingly,
the United Faculty of Florida is certified as the exclusive collective bargaining
representative of the following unit to include all employees in the following
position classifications holding regular and visiting appointments: 9001 - Professor;
9002 - Associate Professor; 9003 - Assistant Professor; 9004 - Instructor; 9005
- Lecturer; 9009 - Eminent Scholar; 9053 - University Librarian; 9054 - Associate
University Librarian; 9055 - Assistant University Librarian; 9056 - Instructor
Librarian; 9115 - Coordinator; 9121 - Assistant in ____; 9126 - Program Director;
9173 - Counselor/Advisor; 9178 - Instructional Specialist; 9434 - Psychologist;
and employees in the above classifications with the administrative titles "Division
Chair" and "Program Director."
RA-2003-010; Order 03E-155 (July 2, 2003)
PALM BEACH COUNTY POLICE BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondent.
"We conclude that the petition meets the requirements of Section 447.307(1),
F.S., We further conclude that the proposed unit is appropriate for the reasons
enunciated by the hearing officer. Accordingly, the Palm Beach County Police
Benevolent Association, Inc., is certified as the exclusive collective bargaining
representative...."
CA-2003-003; Order 03U-156 (July 3, 2003)
WINTER SPRINGS PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3296, Charging Party,
v.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, Respondent
PERC Final Order addressing two exceptions filed by the City and five exceptions
filed by Local 3296 to the hearing officer's April 7, recommended order
regarding the City's proposals for new collective bargaining agreements.
The hearing officer concluded "that the City did not unlawfully impose
the wage article, but did act unlawfully by imposing the management rights article.
He also recommended against an award of attorney's fees and costs to either
party."
The Commission concluded that the City violated its bargaining obligation when the legislative body imposed the "pay freeze" language because it contained a waiver of the employee's bargaining rights (e.g. Palm Beach Junior College v. United Faculty of Palm Beach Junior College, 475 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 1985), which include the right to the continuation of the status quo.
Since parties are prohibited from communicating with the members of the body legislative body about impasse items during the "insulated period," then it follows that any proposal provided to them after impasse is declared that is materially different from the last one exchanged prior to impasse would also be prohibited. As Brevard County v. Brevard County Fire Rescue Association, Local 2969, 12 FPER ¶ 17284 (1986), ruled that parties are required to continue negotiations even after declaration of impasse, "[i]t is only the unilateral submission to a local legislative body of proposals which are materially different from those exchanged during negotiations, following the parties' waiver of appointment of a special master, that is prohibited.... Accordingly, inasmuch as the legislative body imposed a management rights article that was materially different from the last proposal to Local 3296 when the parties waived appointment of a special master, the City acted unlawfully."
Both parties claim they are entitled to attorney's fees and costs for litigating the "pay freeze" language issue. As a prevailing party, only Local 3296 is entitled to such award for only that portion regarding the "pay freeze" language issue. The Commission agrees with the hearing officer that Local 3296 is not entitled to attorney's fees and costs for prevailing in this portion of its charge, as neither the Commission nor the Florida Courts have previously provided direction on this issue, and cannot conclude that the City was aware that its conduct was unlawful. See Fire Rescue Professionals of Alachua County, Local 3852, IAFF v. Alachua County, 28 FPER ¶ 33158 (2002) (ruling that the county could not or should not have known that its conduct was unlawful regarding issue in which the Commission had not previously provided direction).
CA-2003-039; Order 03GC-157 (July 3, 2003)
DENISE VARGAS, Charging Party,
v.
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, Respondent.
General Counsel dismisses Vargas' "one-page typewritten letter"
as a valid means of filing unfair labor charges. She failed to submit the proper
unfair labor practice charge form, as well as supply supporting evidence and
factual information needed to properly assess her case or prove that the respondent
had committed an unfair labor practice.
CA-2003-008; 011 (July 9, 2003)
FLORIDA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES COUNCIL 79, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND
MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO and UNITED FACULTY OF FLORIDA, Charging Parties
v.
FLORIDA BOARD OF GOVERNORS and FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Respondents.
The Florida Board of Governors filed a motion to be dismissed from the case.
This motion was granted by the hearing officer as she determined that the Board
of Governors is not appropriately named as public employer in this action.
WB-2003-002; Order 03WB-158 (July 8, 2003)
BARBARA TAYLOR, Complainant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Respondent.
After the Commission disposed "all of Taylor's exceptions agrees
with the hearing officer that Taylor's complaint is barred by her election
of remedies and it is, therefore, dismissed." Taylor utilized the grievance
procedure prior to filing a whistle-blower complaint. According to Sections
112.3187 and 447.401, F.S., and the doctrine of election of remedies, she would
only be able to use one remedy to resolve the same disciplinary action.
RC-2003-021; 036; Order 03E-159 (July 9, 2003)
COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, CLC, Petitioner,
v.
CITY OF MADEIRA BEACH, Respondent.
The Commission adopts the hearing officer's recommended order and concludes
that the proposed units are appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.
[ From Attorney General's Appellate Alert]
"Timeliness of appeal of agency decision... A state commission correctly found that a woman is not entitled to unemployment benefits because she cannot prove that she faxed in an appeal on time, the 1st DCA held over the objects of one judge who said the agency failed the dispute the woman's assertion that she properly sent the fax.
Nadine Mendelsohn lost a bid for unemployment compensation, and the Unemployment Appeals Commission concluded that her appeal of that determination was not received within the 20-day window for filing. Mendelsohn insisted she faxed her appeal three days before the deadline, but could offer no proof other than a telephone record showing a one-minute call to the commission on that date. Two members of the DCA's three-judge panel found evidentiary support to uphold the commission's decision, including 'the absence of any evidence to show that a timely fax request was ever received for filing in the appeals office.'
Writing in dissent, Judge Benton took the opposite approach. 'A telephone
bill received as an exhibit at the hearing corroborates un-rebutted testimony
that the fax call went through ... Even uncorroborated testimony that mail has
been sent or that a facsimile transmission has been made raises a presumption
of delivery. This presumption went unrebutted here. Nobody testified that the
Commission did not receive the fax Ms. Mendelsohn testified she sent,'
the judge wrote in support of Mendelsohn's appeal."
[Mendelsohn v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 6/26/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/ac19483ff7e22c1085256d5100674a0a!OpenDocument
"Validity of fee for state deferred comp plan... A challenge to administrative fees assessed when state employees enroll in a deferred compensation plan cannot survive because the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the assessment, the 1st DCA said.
Record-keeping services associated with the deferred compensation program are contracted by a private company, which is paid through a fee submitted by investment providers. The providers recover this cost by adding it to the fees paid by state workers who use the deferred compensation program. Two employees challenged the statutory authority for the assessments. A trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the state, determining that authority for the administrative assessments was inherent in the statutory authority given to the state to contract for administrative services. The trial court also said the plaintiffs waived their challenge when they signed deferred compensation enrollment forms that identified the fees.
The DCA said it did not have to evaluate either of the trial court's reasons
for ruling against the employees because standing actually lies with the investment
providers who actually submit the fee. '(The appellants') challenge is
addressed to the issue of statutory authorization for the contested fees assessed
in the contracts between the state and the investment providers. Even if the
appellants were able to prevail on this claim, it does not appear that this
would invalidate the providers' separate contracts with the appellees. A successful
challenge to the contested amounts would therefore not necessarily benefit the
appellees, who would presumably still be obligated for the administrative fees
in their contracts with the providers,' the DCA said."
[Nedeau and Gomez v. Gallagher, 6/30/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/26103259083c355585256d5f006de3fc!OpenDocument
Medical proof required for disability retirement... Contrary to a state agency's rules, an injured member of the Florida Retirement System who seeks disability retirement benefits is not compelled to have a doctor certify that he is totally and permanently disabled in order to qualify for disability benefits, the 1st DCA held.
As it did nine years ago, the DCA asked the Florida Supreme Court to determine what medical evidence a claimant must present to the Florida Retirement Commission to receive disability benefits. A commission rule requires 'competent medical evidence of total and permanent disability,' but the DCA held in 1994 that Florida law does not require a physician's opinion certifying total and permanent disability. The present case involved a Baker County School Board maintenance worker who was injured on the job. The worker's doctor gave him a 12 percent permanent impairment rating, and the Retirement Commission concluded that was insufficient to justify disability retirement benefits. The DCA disagreed, citing the difference between impairment - a medical determination - and disability, which combines medical considerations with job-related duties.
'Thus, while the determination of impairment is a medical matter, the
determination of disability is not solely a medical issue, but involves using
non-medical evidence as well,' the DCA explained. 'While the statute
does require medical evidence of the impairment, ... the Commission has broader
discretion than the (Retirement) Director and may determine whether an applicant
is permanently totally disabled based upon medical testimony, vocational testimony,
and any other pertinent evidence before it."
[Carver v. Division of Retirement, 7/3/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/4152da6030543aa285256d5f006e296d!OpenDocument
"Constitutionality of courthouse Ten Commandments display... The chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment when he installed a two-and-a-half ton monument to the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the Alabama State Judicial Building, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held.
The court said the placement of the monument as the centerpiece of the rotunda created the impression 'of being in the presence of something holy and sacred.' The 11th Circuit concluded that Chief Justice Roy S. Moore's purpose in displaying the monument was non-secular and said the monument's primary purpose was to advance religion. The court also rejected the chief justice's assertion that, because he is head of an independent unit of government, no court below the U.S. Supreme Court has the authority to order the removal over his objections.
'The rule of law does require that every person obey judicial orders
when all available means of appealing them have been exhausted. The chief justice
of a state supreme court, of all people, should be expected to abide by that
principle. We do expect that if he is unable to have the district court's order
overturned through the usual appellate processes, when the time comes Chief
Justice Moore will obey that order. If necessary, the court order will be enforced.
The rule of law will prevail,' the 11th Circuit said."
[Glassroth v. Moore, 7/1/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/3cec5137456ef72285256d5f006e10ef!OpenDocument
"Use of hearsay evidence in administrative hearing... An administrative hearing cannot be determined solely based on hearsay evidence that would not be admissible in a civil proceeding, the 2nd DCA said.
The court reversed an order denying unemployment benefits to a hospice worker who was fired for falling behind in making required contact with clients. The man's supervisors testified about his failure to manage his caseload, but their testimony was based only on time sheets and logs that were not introduced into evidence as business records. The court said the worker's shortcomings may have warranted his firing but, based on the evidence presented, did not amount to misconduct sufficient to deny unemployment benefits.
'In administrative proceedings, including hearings before unemployment
compensation appeals referees, hearsay evidence is admissible only for the purpose
of explaining or supplementing other evidence. It is not sufficient, standing
alone, to prove a material fact in issue unless it would be admissible over
objection in a civil proceeding. The computer report was hearsay. ... That being
the case, the testimony describing the report's content was double hearsay that
was not admissible under the exception,' the DCA said."
[Yost v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 7/9/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/ead85b2fe06607a985256d5f006e3dcf!OpenDocument
"Agency's obligation re: eminent domain... A state agency that properly sent out written offers, and then waited the required time for a response, complied fully with eminent domain requirements and cannot be forced to negotiate further, the 2nd DCA held.
The court rejected the claim of property owners who challenged a trial court's eminent domain order of taking in favor of the Department of Environmental Protection. The owners argued that DEP failed to comply with pre-suit negotiation requirements and failed to present a good faith estimate of value based on a valid appraisal. The DCA disagreed, noting that the department sent out, and the property owners received, two written offers that complied with statutory requirements.
'The appellants neglected to respond to the offers, and the Department
filed suit after waiting the requisite thirty days under the statute. We reject
the appellants' argument that the Department's duty to negotiate extended beyond
its duty to send the written offers and await a response in this case. To the
contrary, the appellants' failure to respond to the offers ended the negotiations,'
the DCA said."
[Simmons, et al., v. Department of Environmental Protection, 7/9/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/378e795f64d8347885256d5f006e5983!OpenDocument
"Unemployment benefits - suspected Medicare fraud... An employee who quits her job because she reasonably believes her boss is engaged in Medicare fraud and doesn't want to be liable herself is entitled to unemployment compensation benefits, the 4th DCA held.
Connie Ayers worked for a business that supplied medical shoes and orthotics to people with diabetes, eventually handling the company's billing activities. Ayers became suspicious of the billing practices, and contacted a Medicare benefits administration unit and initiated an investigation. Ayers then quit her job, fearing that she could be held liable if the billing practices were deemed to be Medicare fraud. An appeals referee found that Ayers had acted reasonably and shown good cause attributable to the employer, which would qualify her for unemployment benefits. However, the state Unemployment Appeals Commission rejected that conclusion and denied benefits. The DCA reversed.
'Clearly, an employer's requiring an employee to perform acts which the
employee reasonably believes violate the law furnishes the employee with good
cause, attributable to the employer, to voluntarily leave employment,'
the DCA said."
[Ayers v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 7/9/03]
http://www.myfloridalegal.com/alerts.nsf/e72b1e067994666c852562910072f437/c4ffdd590979125685256d5f006e72d1!OpenDocument
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