Decision 1898M – Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1704 (Buck)

LA-CO-29-M

Decision Date: April 10, 2007

Decision Type: PERB Decision

Description:  The Board affirmed a proposed decision in which the ALJ found the Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1704 (ATU) violated its duty of fair representation when it failed to timely file a grievance on the charging party’s behalf.  The Board further affirmed the ALJ’s determination that backpay was not appropriate under the facts of this case.

Disposition:  Because ATU possessed the exclusive means by which the charging party could obtain his contractual remedy, ATU owed the charging party a duty of fair representation.  However, since the charging party failed to prove he would have won his case if it was properly filed, a backpay award was not appropriate in this instance.

View Full Text (PDF)

Perc Vol: 31
Perc Index: 88

Decision Headnotes

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.01000 – In General; Prima Facie Case

Under the MMBA, unions owe a duty of fair representation to their members. A union breaches that duty when its conduct toward its members is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith. The duty of fair representation is limited to negotiations and contractually based remedies under the union’s exclusive control. In general, the duty of fair representation attaches only when the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a particular remedy. When an MOU preserves the right of a union to both participate in the grievance proceedings and control all requests for grievance arbitration, the union possesses the exclusive means by which an aggrieved employee can obtain a contractually based remedy. Accordingly, in such cases, the duty of fair representation attaches.

800.00000 – UNION UNFAIR PRACTICES; DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
800.02000 – Grievance Handling/Contract Administration

Unions are accorded wide latitude in the representation of its members. Accordingly, absent a showing of arbitrary exercise of the union’s power, the duty of fair representation is not typically breached by mere negligence. However, mere negligence may be deemed to be arbitrary in cases in which the individual interest at stake is strong and the union’s failure to perform a ministerial act completely extinguishes the employee’s right to pursue his claim. In cases involving a union’s failure to file a grievance, a charging party may recover a make-whole remedy only if the charging party demonstrates that he/she would have prevailed on the merits if the grievance was properly processed.

1201.00000 – REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; REINSTATEMENT; BACKPAY BENEFITS
1201.03000 – Back Pay; Interest

In cases involving a union’s failure to file a grievance, a charging party may recover a make-whole remedy only if the charging party demonstrates that he/she would have prevailed on the merits if the grievance was properly processed.

1204.00000 – REMEDIES FOR UNFAIR PRACTICES; REMEDIES AGAINST UNION
1204.01000 – In General

In cases involving a union’s failure to file a grievance, a charging party may recover a make-whole remedy only if the charging party demonstrates that he/she would have prevailed on the merits if the grievance was properly processed.