Meeting - April 24, 2008
Alan Joscelyn, Presiding Officer
Marieke Beck, Board Attorney
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Member Reardon moved to adopt the minutes of the July 26, 2007 meeting. The motion was seconded by member Johnson. The motion was approved unanimously.
NEXT MEETING DATE:
There is a Unit Determination case on appeal. However, that case may be resolved before reaching the Board. If that doesn't occur, the next meeting will be scheduled for July 24th pending schedules of the two regular Board members not present. There is also a case that will be scheduled for the September 18, 2008 Board Meeting to be held at the Annual Labor Relations Conference in Missoula.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (HOUSE BILL 94):
No comments were received.
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CHARGE NO. 1-2007
FRAZER EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, MEA-MFT VS FRAZER BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Richard Larson, attorney for the Frazer Education Association presented oral argument in person and Michael Dahle m, attorney for the Frazer Board of Trustees, presented oral argument via telephone conference call. The Board discussed the implications of 39-31-307 MCA on a declaration of impasse by the parties given the charge of the statute.
Member Reardon moved to affirm the recommended decision of the hearing officer on remand dated February 21, 2008. Member Audet seconded the motion. After discussion the motion failed with chair Joscelyn and members Dudley, Johnson and Audet voting nay and member Reardon voting aye.
After further discussion member Johnson moved to overturn the recommended decision of the hearing officer on remand dated February 21, 2008, and consider whether the Board should affirm the original recommended order of the hearing officer dated May 9, 2007. After further discussion member Johnson withdrew the original motion and with the concurrence of the Board offered a substitute motion that the Board overturn the recommended decision of the hearing officer on remand dated February 21, 2008 as the hearing officer misapprehended the Columbia Falls decision as the Board does not believe a sixth test is necessary to reach impasse. Member Dudley seconded the motion and after further discussion the motion passed unanimously.
The Board then went on to discuss the original decision of the hearing officer dated May 9, 2007. Member Johnson moved to affirm the original decision of the hearing officer. Member Dudley seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously.
Marieke discussed possible rules revisions with the Board. In the area of a possible change to the time fra mes used in unit determination member Reardon moved that the Board have staff review possible changes and offer them at the next meeting. Member Johnson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously.
On the question of possible rules revision to the section that addresses findings of no merit in unfair labor practice charges member Johnson moved that staff draft possible recommendations for discussion at the next Board meeting. The motion was seconded by member Reardon. The motion passed unanimously.
The Board next reviewed a proposed protocol between the Board of Personnel Appeals and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. After discussing the issue and proposed protocol, member Audet moved to adopt the draft offered by Marieke. The motion was seconded by member Dudley. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC COMMENTS (HOUSE BILL 94):
One comment concerning unfair labor practice charge investigations was offered by Arlyn Plowman. M r. Plowman opined that although the collective bargaining act for public employees was patterned after its federal counterpart the Board of Personnel Appeals had never been provided with sufficient resources to investigate unfair labor practice charges in the same manner as does the National Labor Relations Board. The Board thanked M r. Plowman for his observations and comments.