19
CIR 188 (2016)
NEBRASKA COMMISSION OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
SERVICE
EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL
UNION, (AFL-CIO)
LOCAL 226, Petitioner, v. DOUGLAS
COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
001, Respondent. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
CASE
NO. 1422 FINDINGS
AND ORDER |
Filed
December 19, 2016
APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner: Timothy S. Dowd
Dowd,
Howard & Corrigan, LLC
1411
Harney Street, Suite 100
Omaha,
NE 68102
For
Respondent: David
J. Kramer
Baird
Holm LLP
1700 Farnam
Street, Suite 1500
Omaha, NE 68102
Before
Commissioners Carlson, Partsch and Blake
CARLSON,
Commissioner
NATURE OF THE CASE
On July 11, 2016, the Service
Employees International Union, (AFL-CIO) Local 226 (“Union” or “Petitioner”)
filed this action with the Commission, alleging that Douglas County School
District 001 (“Respondent”) committed a prohibited practice in violation of the
Nebraska Industrial Relations Act (“Act”), Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-824(1) when
Respondent subcontracted bargaining unit work, which is a unilateral change of
the terms and conditions of employment. A
joint Stipulation was filed on December 12, 2016 requesting that the Commission
issue this order.
FACTS
The
Commission accepts the following facts as true pursuant to the Stipulation
entered into by the parties. Petitioner is a labor organization as defined in
Nebraska Revised Statute §48-801(6), and is the duly recognized collective
bargaining representative for the full-time employees in the Maintenance and
Operations Division of the Douglas County School District. The Petitioner has
in force and effect a Collective Bargaining Agreement with Respondent covering
such collective bargaining units. Respondent is an employer within the meaning
of Nebraska Revised Statute §48-801(4) with its principal office located at
3215 Cuming Street, Omaha, NE 68131.
The
work of the bargaining unit employees represented by the Petitioner includes
moving supplies, equipment, product, furniture, and other items from and to the
schools before, during, and at the end of the school years, as well as the cutting,
trimming, and maintenance of trees on Respondent's properties. The above-described
bargaining unit work has generally been exclusively performed by the bargaining
unit employees represented by Petitioner. Respondent subcontracted some of the
above-described bargaining unit work to non-bargaining unit employees and
companies as a result of the passage of a bond issue. Respondent failed to
negotiate the decision to subcontract out such bargaining unit work prior to
subcontracting it. Respondent's failure to negotiate the subcontracting of the
above referenced bargaining unit work to non-bargaining unit employees and
companies constituted a change in terms and conditions of employment with
respect to a mandatory subject of collective bargaining, and as such,
constituted a prohibited practice in violation of Nebraska Revised Statute §48-824(1).
Respondent has ceased subcontracting bargaining unit work to non-bargaining
unit employees and companies.
DISCUSSION
Petitioner
and Respondent agree that Respondent failed to negotiate the decision to
subcontract out the above-mentioned bargaining unit work prior to
subcontracting it. The parties also agree that Respondent's failure to
negotiate the subcontracting of that bargaining unit work to non-bargaining
unit employees and companies constituted a change in terms and conditions of
employment with respect to a mandatory subject of collective bargaining, and as
such, constituted a prohibited practice in violation of Nebraska Revised
Statute §48-824(1). Respondent has
ceased subcontracting bargaining unit work to non-bargaining unit employees and
companies. Petitioner and Respondent agree that the dispute pending before the Commission
in the above captioned matter may be resolved in favor of the Petitioner by the
entry of an Order directing Respondent to maintain the status that existed
prior to the subcontracting out of the above-described bargaining unit work to
non-bargaining unit employees and companies.
Jurisdiction
The
Commission has been given jurisdiction to adjudicate alleged violations of the
Act by virtue of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-824 and 48-825.
Prohibited
Practice Allegations
Neb.
Rev. Stat. § 48-824)(1) states:
(1)
It is a prohibited practice for any public
employer, public employee, public employee organization, or
collective-bargaining agent to refuse to negotiate in good faith with respect
to mandatory topics of bargaining.
Neb. Rev. Stat. §
48-824
The Commission agrees with the stipulation
of the parties and hereby finds that the Respondent committed a prohibited
practice when it subcontracted bargaining unit work.
REMEDIAL AUTHORITY
The Commission has the authority to
issue cease and desist orders following findings of prohibited practices and
has done so in the past. See Local Union 571 International Union of
Operating Engineers v. County of Douglas, 15 CIR 75 (2005); Ewing
Education Ass’n v. Holt County School District No. 29, 12 CIR 242 (1996)(en
banc). In
the present case, the Commission finds that the Respondent has committed a
prohibited practice under the Nebraska Industrial Relations Act. Therefore, an
order requiring that the Respondent cease and desist from committing the
prohibited practice is clearly within the authority of the Commission and will
be ordered.
IT
IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent shall:
1. Cease
and desist from failing to bargain in good faith with the Service Employees
International Union, (AFL-CIO) Local 226 regarding mandatory subjects of
bargaining.
2. Cease
and desist from subcontracting bargaining unit work without first bargaining to
impasse.
All
Panel Commissioners join in the entry of this Order.