ARB-14-4187 Award  pdf format of ARB-14-4187 Award

Wareham School Committee and AFSCME, Council 93, AFL-CIO, ARB-14-4187, Arbitration Award (August 13, 2015). The issues in this case were: Is the grievance arbitrable?  Did the Employer violate Article IX of the Agreement?

The arbitrator found the grievance was substantively arbitrable as it challenges the process used for filling the lead custodian position, and the School Committee’s adherence to Article IX of the Agreement.

The clear and unambiguous language of the Agreement permits the Employer to judge ability, qualifications and performance in promotional situations, and having found that the evaluative process used and the categories considered in this case to be proper and consistent with Article IX, the arbitrator found that the School Committee did not violate Article IX of the Agreement when it promoted Cleveland to the position of lead custodian, and the grievance is denied.

MCR-14-3997 CERB Decision  pdf format of MCR-14-3997 CERB Decision
file size 2MB

Town of Monson and Monson Call Fire Organization, MCR-14-3997 CERB Decision (August 28, 2015). The issue in this case was whether the Town of Monson (Town) Fire Department on-call (call) employees are eligible to vote in a representation election.  The Monson Call Fire Organization (Union) argued that the call employees are regular part-time employees.  The Town argued that the call employees are casual employees because none of them has responded on a compensated basis to at least 33% of the total number of alarms sounded in the past fiscal year.  In this case, however, the nature of the work that call firefighter/EMTs, EMTs, and non-firefighter/nonEMTs perform extended beyond responding to alarms and includes working regularly-scheduled weekday and weekend per diem shifts that are staffed only by call employees.  Under these circumstances, the CERB did not assess whether these employees had sufficient continuity and regularity of employment to enjoy collective bargaining rights solely on their alarm response rate.  Rather, the CERB ruled that call employees who, in the fiscal year preceding its decision, performed work for which they had been compensated at an hourly rate for no less than 33%, i.e., 858 hours, of the 2600 hours a full-time firefighter is scheduled to work per year, had sufficient continuity of employment to entitle them to collective bargaining rights and could vote in the election.

SUP-12-2282-SUPL-12-2283 CERB Decision  pdf format of SUP-12-2282-SUPL-12-2283 CERB Decision

Commonwealth of Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration & Finance and Glennis Ogaldez, SUP-12-2282 CERB Decision and Massachusetts Correction Officers Federated Union and Glennis Ogaldez, CERB Decision (August 24, 2015). This case involved consolidated prohibited practice charges that Glennis Ogaldez (Ogaldez) brought against her union and her employer on October 12, 2012.  Ogaldez, a corrections officer at the Boston Pre-Release Center alleged in Case No. SUP-12-2282 that the Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration (Employer), acting through the Department of Corrections (DOC), violated Section 10(a)(3) and, derivatively, Section 10(a)(1) of M.G.L. c. 150E (the Law) by detaching Ogaldez with pay for engaging in protected concerted activity.  In Case No. SUPL-12-2283, Ogaldez alleged that the Massachusetts Correction Officers Federated Union (MCOFU or Union) violated Section 10(b)(1) of the Law through statements that shop steward made to her.  On May 7, 2015, a Department of Labor Relations hearing Officer (Hearing Officer) issued a decision dismissing the retaliation allegation but concluding that the Union had violated the Law as alleged. Ogaldez and the Union appealed their respective losses. After reviewing the record on appeal, the CERB found no basis to disturb the Hearing Officer’s findings of fact or conclusions of law and affirmed the decision in its entirety. 

SUP-12-3200 H.O. Decision  pdf format of SUP-12-3200 H.O. Decision

Commonwealth of Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration and Finance and Alliance, AFSCME-SEIU, Local 509, SUP-13-3200 Hearing Officer Decision (August 11, 2015). The issue in this case is whether the Commonwealth of Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration (Commonwealth), acting through the Department of Mental Health (DMH), independently violated Section 10(a)(1) of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 150E (the Law) by interfering with, restraining and coercing Alliance, AFSCME-SEIU, Local 509’s (Union) bargaining unit member Jean Calvert (Calvert) in the exercise of her Section 2 rights.  I find that the Commonwealth violated the Law in the manner alleged.

SUP-12-3200 H.O. Decision  pdf format of SUP-12-3200 H.O. Decision

Commonwealth of Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration and Finance and Alliance, AFSCME-SEIU, Local 509, SUP-13-3200 Hearing Officer Decision (August 11, 2015). The issue in this case is whether the Commonwealth of Massachusetts/Commissioner of Administration (Commonwealth), acting through the Department of Mental Health (DMH), independently violated Section 10(a)(1) of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 150E (the Law) by interfering with, restraining and coercing Alliance, AFSCME-SEIU, Local 509’s (Union) bargaining unit member Jean Calvert (Calvert) in the exercise of her Section 2 rights.  I find that the Commonwealth violated the Law in the manner alleged.

SUPL-13-2628 H.O.  pdf format of SUPL-13-2628 H.O.
file size 1MB

University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Faculty Federation Local 1895, AFT, AFL-CIO and Chidiebere Nwaubani, SUPL-13-2628, Hearing Officer’s Decision and Order (August 20, 2015). The issue in this case is whether the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Faculty Federation Local 1865 (Union) violated Section 10(b)(1) of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 150E (the Law) by failing to act upon bargaining unit member Chidiebere Nwaubani’s (Charging Party or Nwaubani) request to file a grievance.  I find that the Union violated the Law.

WMAP-15-4647 CERB Decision  pdf format of WMAP-15-4647 CERB Decision

SEIU, Local 888 and Committee for Public Counsel Services, WMAP-15-4647 CERB Decision (August 31, 2015).  The CERB dismissed a petition for written majority authorization filed under M.G.L. c. 150A (the Law) seeking to form a bargaining unit of lawyers and administrative staff employed by the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS).  Although it was undisputed that the petitioned-for employees were public employees, the CERB concluded that CPCS was a state agency that was excluded from Section 2 of the law’s definition of employer. Consequently, absent legislation indicating that CPCS was a Chapter 150A employer, the CERB was without authority to grant CPCS employees bargaining rights under the Law.