EMPLOYER ADOPTION/ENFORCEMENT OF UNREASONABLE RULE – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2163M

View all topics for Decision 2163M

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

County unreasonably applied its local unit modification rules to deny petitions to add unrepresented per diem employees to existing bargaining units. It was unreasonable for the county to require a showing of majority support among the employees to be added when: (1) the local rules did not contain a support requirement for unit modification; and (2) no principle of labor law requires a showing of majority support any time unrepresented employees are added to an existing unit. The County also unreasonably applied its rules when it denied the union’s modified petitions as untimely; the County’s interpretation of the applicable local rule would prevent a petitioner from correcting procedural deficiencies if the petition is denied near or after the end of the “window period” for filing.