Opinion

State ex rel. Brecksville Education Ass'n v. State Employment Relations Board

  • 74 Ohio St. 3d 665
Court
Ohio Supreme Court
Filed
Mar 1, 1996
Status
Published
Author
Douglas
On the bench
Cook, Douglas, Moyer, Pfeifer, Resnick, Sweeney, Syllabus, Wright
Cited by
25 cases

State Employment Relations Board has jurisdiction to consider joint petition by the public employer and public employee representative for amended certification of the deemed certified collective bargaining unit

How later courts described this case

  • State Employment Relations Board has jurisdiction to consider joint petition by the public employer and public employee representative for amended certification of the deemed certified collective bargaining unit

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Douglas, J.,

concurring. I concur in the syllabus and judgment of the majority. I write separately to make two points wherein I disagree with the majority.

The majority states that “ * * * the language of Section 4(A) of Am.Sub.S.B. No. 133 does not expressly protect the composition of the bargaining unit.” I respectfully disagree. I believe that Section 4(A) does protect the deemed certified unit, including composition, from attack by all but another employee organization. That, in fact, is the real substance of Ohio Council 8. This does not say, however, as the majority clearly points out, that the composition of a unit cannot be changed by the joint agreement of the unit and the public employer. Such an agreement is not an attack.

The majority also says, in discussing Am.Sub.S.B. No. 133, that “[t]here is no indication * * * that the intent of the legislature was slavish adherence to the 1983 status quo.” While I would not call it “slavish adherence,” I would say and I do believe that the intent of the legislature was to codify then existing bargaining relationships, so as to maintain the status quo between public employers and their employees who at that time had a collective bargaining history and, often, a contractual relationship.

With the foregoing exceptions, I concur with the well-reasoned syllabus, opinion and judgment of the majority.

Resnick, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.