UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION – In General; Prima Facie Case
Single Topic for Decision 2462C
Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case
Because the duty of fair representation is the quid pro quo for the exclusive representative’s right to employees, the absence of a duty of fair representation language in the Trial Court Act does not indicate legislative intent to deprive PERB of jurisdiction to consider duty of fair representation cases brought by Trial Court employees. Misspellings or minor, non-prejudicial errors in a person’s title or job duties were not grounds for reversing dismissal of employee’s unfair practice charge alleging that her representative had violated its duty of fair representation. Amended charge, which alleged that arbitration procedure was contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between her representative and the Trial Court employer and that the matters raised in her charge overlapped with issues of a grievance that was subject to the arbitration procedure, was sufficient to demonstrate that the arbitration proceedings were part of a collectively-bargained grievance procedure to which the duty of fair representation attached rather than extra-contractual proceedings for which no such duty attaches. Board declined to adopt that portion of the dismissal letter concluding that the charge was deficient because it did not include a copy of the applicable MOU or allege facts showing that an arbitration hearing was pursued through a negotiated appeal process contained in the MOU.