Decisions and Orders Digest for 1992

General Teamsters Local 959 vs. City of North Pole, Decision & Order No. 139 (01/09/1992). City of North Pole Resolution 72-8 was effective under Section 4, ch. 113, S.L.A. 1972, to reject application of the Public Employment Relations Act to the City.

International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 302 vs. City of Kotzebue, Decision & Order No. 140 (05/28/1992). The Public Employment Relations Act applies unless a municipality affirmatively acts to reject it by ordinance or resolution. A municipality must act promptly and not at its leisure. Adopting an ordinance rejecting PERA approximately three and one half years after the enactment of PERA is not acting promptly and is ineffective to reject PERA.

Inlandboatmen's Union of the Pacific vs. State of Ak (DOT-PF/AMHS), Decision & Order No. 141 (07/15/1992). An employer can commit an unfair labor practice by implementing a change to a condition of employment in a collective bargaining agreement without first negotiating to impasse. A labor organization can waive the right to bargain by failing to respond to an employer's notice of a prospective change.

Fairbanks Fire Fighters Association, Local 1324, Intl Ass'n of Fire Fighters vs. City of Fairbanks, Decision & Order No. 142 (08/07/1992). When enforcing a collective bargaining agreement under AS 23.40.210, the Alaska Labor Relations Agency will not substitute for the arbitrator under the agreement's grievance arbitration clause. Instead, it will enforce the agreement by compelling arbitration under the grievance arbitration clause in the agreement.

Alaska Public Employees Association vs. State of Alaska, Decision & Order No. 143 (09/16/1992). Adult field probation officers and juvenile probation officers are employees whose services may not be interrupted for even the shortest time under AS 23.40.200(a) and, therefore, are class 1 employees denied the right to strike under AS 23.40.200(d) but entitled to arbitration under AS 23.40.200(b).

State of Alaska vs. Public Employees Local 71 and Alaska Public Employees Association, Decision & Order No. 144 (09/22/1992). The food service manager at the Valdez Harborview Developmental Center shares a community of interest with the Labor, Trades and Crafts unit rather than the supervisory unit because the position does not meet the requirements for supervisor in 2 AAC 10.220(b)(3). Decision Appealed: State of Alaska vs. Public Employees Local 71 and Alaska Public Employees Association, Decision & Order No. 144 (09/22/1992). Superior Court AFFIRMED Agency decision and order in case number 1JU-92-2105CI on February 14, 1994.

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1547 vs. Thomas Bay Power Authority, Decision & Order No. 145 (11/25/1992). Acting to reject the Public Employment Relations Act more than one year after a local government had the capacity to reject it is untimely and ineffective.

Alaska Public Employees Association/AFT vs. Ketchikan Gateway Borough and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1547, Decision & Order No. 146, (11/25/1992). After assuming an areawide power over parks and recreation from the City of Ketchikan, the Ketchikan Gateway Borough succeededto the City's bargaining representative and its collective bargaining agreement for the term of the agreement. This unit ofparks and recreation department employees is appropriate under AS 23.40.090.

State of Alaska vs. Alaska Public Employees Association and Alaska State Employees Association, AFSCME Local 52, AFL-CIO, Decision & Order No. 147 (11/25/1992). The environmental conservation manager at the facility construction and operation office of the Department of Environmental Conservation in Juneau shares a community of interest with the general government unit rather than the supervisory unit because the position does not meet the requirements for supervisor in 2 AAC 10.220(b)(3).

University of Alaska Classified Employees Association/APEA/AFT vs. University of Alaska, Decision & Order No. 148 (11/25/1992). Applying such factors as community of interest, wages, hours and other working conditions, the history of collective bargaining and the desires of the employees, we find that a statewide unit of blue collar trades, maintenance, and custodial employees is appropriate at the University of Alaska.

Inlandboatmen's Union of the Pacific, Ak Region;Meba Dist #1;Intl Org M.M. & Pilots vs. State of Alaska, Alaska Marine Highway System, Decision & Order No. 149 (12/03/1992). The remedy for refusal to bargain in good faith in violation of AS 23.10.110 is an order to cease and desist the refusal to bargain and an order to bargain in good faith upon a request. When the refusal to bargain involves unilateral action, the parties are, in addition, usually returned to the status quo ante. However, in this case to avoid unintentional interference with Coast Guard regulations and requirements, the Agency departs from the usual remedy and does not order return to the status quo ante.

Totem Association of Educational Support Personnel vs. Anchorage School District, Decision & Order No. 150 (12/03/1992). A party's vague, contradictory, and confusing statements about its position constitute a refusal to bargain in good faith under the Public Employment Relations Act, AS 23.40.110(a)(5).

Teamsters Local 959 vs. City of Whittier, Decision & Order No. 151 (12/03/1992). Under AS 23.40.090, based on such factors as community of interest and the prohibition against fragmenting bargaining units, the unit appropriate for collective bargaining in the City of Whittier includes all permanent employees of the City of Whittier, including the public works director, harbormaster, physician's assistant, and the librarian, but excludes the city manager, city clerk, finance director, police chief, and seasonal workers.

Alaska Public Employees Association vs. City of Bethel, Decision & Order No. 152 (12/30/1992). Even if the City of Bethel could permissibly withdraw recognition of a bargaining representative certified by a labor relations agency after bargaining stopped in 1980, it could not permissibly reject the Public Employment Relations Act in 1982 due to delay, impermissible motive, and waiver.

Back to Labor Relations || Summary