The Public Employment Relations Commission has found the state guilty of an unfair labor practice over supplemental bargaining in General Government.
The union last year attempted to have separate tables to bargain agency-specific issues that sometimes get pushed aside in bargaining over the full contract at the master table.
A PERC hearing examiner ruled Friday (June 3) that the state’s reluctance to bargain based on a “contentious and acrimonious” experience in previous supplemental bargaining constituted interference with employee rights. That condition amounted to a “threat or promise of benefit associated with the exercise of protected rights,” the ruling said.
Under the ruling, the state must not condition future bargaining on its previous experience bargaining with one agency.
On a second issue, the examiner ruled the state’s reluctance to bargain agency-specific issues at separate tables was not evidence of a refusal to bargain.
Each side has 20 days to appeal the ruling.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment Policy
We appreciate our readers and thank you for adding to the discussion. The following guidelines are established to ensure respectful tone in the comments of readers so we can all enjoy the site.
• Keep comments on topic - any comment that appears to be off-topic will be edited or deleted.
• Profanity - we’re PG13 here. Moderate language is allowed, but we reserve the right to edit out anything offensive.
• Personal attacks - personal attacks on the authors or other commentators will result in an immediate ban.
• Editor’s right - While we encourage comments that challenge or offer constructed criticism, we reserve the right to edit or remove any post, and to ban a user.*
• External linking - external links are ok, if they are relevant to the original post and your comment. Simply linking to your own site will be frowned upon.
Final Words
You, and only you, are responsible for your words. Once your comment is submitted, that’s it — you’re immortalized. Think before you submit.
*WFSE members are protected under the following Communications Ethics policy:
Under the provisions of the AFSCME “Bill of Rights for Union Members” regarding communications, “Members shall suffer no impairment of freedom of speech concerning the operations of this union. Active discussion of union affairs shall be encouraged and protected within this organization.”
If you believe your comments were removed unfairly, you may protest the removal of your post to the Communications Committee. Leave your protest at Contact Us on WFSE.org