UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- - PAGE 1 - 2017/UP-036-17... · UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- -...
Transcript of UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- - PAGE 1 - 2017/UP-036-17... · UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- -...
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- - PAGE 1
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT
PARTIES
1. Portland Fire Fighters’ Association, Local 43, IAFF (“PFFA” or
“Union”) is a labor organization within the meaning of ORS 243.650(13).
2. PFFA is the exclusive bargaining representative of a bargaining unit
of sworn personnel working in the Fire Bureau of the City of Portland.
3. The City of Portland ("City") is a public employer within the meaning
of ORS 243.650(20).
4. The Union and the City have been parties to collective bargaining
agreements going back many years. The most recent agreement expired on or
about June 30, 2016.
5. The parties began bargaining for a successor agreement on or about
April 1, 2016. They met for table bargaining on 27 occasions from April 1 to
December 20, 2016. They held three mediation sessions on January 1, 30 and
February 12, 2017. The parties exchanged final offers on March 24, 2017 and
filed their last best offers on or about August 29-30, 2017.
6. The parties engaged in a interest arbitration proceeding on or about
September 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 25, 26, 29 and October 9 and 10, 2017. The
parties anticipate receiving an award from the interest arbitrator by the end of
December 2017.
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- - PAGE 2
7. On or about July 4, 2013, the City Council eliminated the 25-member
Fire Bureau Dive Team, which were premium pay positions under the union
contract. The elimination of the dive team resulted in significant loss of
compensation to bargaining unit members. The dive team had been in existence
for over twenty years and its compensation was part of the status quo.
8. On or about December 26, 2013, the PFFA filed an unfair labor
practice that the elimination of the dive team was an unlawful unilateral change.
The Board did not reach the merits of the claim. That case is currently under
review before the Oregon Court of Appeals.
9. In the City’s 2015-16 Budget, the City restored funding for reduced
Dive Recue team composed of 13 members. Prior to the elimination of the team in
2013, the team had historically been composed of approximately 25 members. The
13-member Dive Team was funded for two years, from 2015-2016 to 2016-2017.
10. On or about June 8, 2017, the City voted to eliminate the Dive Team
for 2016-2017. This resulted in reduction of premium pay under the status quo
created by the expired union contract and past practice, defined as the practice
from prior to 2013 and from 2015-2017.
11. Under settled law, the City may not contract out or eliminate
bargaining unit work without bargaining. The City violated ORS 243.672(1)(e)
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINT- - PAGE 3
when it eliminated the Dive Team in June 2017, while the parties were in dispute
resolution processes under PECBA for a successor agreement.
12. Because of the filing of the first ULP, the City knew or should have
known that reducing compensation during the negotiations and dispute resolution
period is unlawful. The City’s actions are therefore a knowing violation of the
PECBA for which a civil penalty should be awarded of $1,000. In addition, the
City has been found guilty of violating 1(e) in recent ERB cases and the violation
is therefore repetitive.
WHEREFORE, the PFFA prays for an order from the Board as follows:
1. Declaring that the City's actions violate ORS 243.672(1)(e).
2. Requiring the City to post appropriate notices of its wrongdoing at all
work sites where Dive Team members perform work;
3. Awarding the PFFA its full representation costs and filing fees to be
paid by the City and a civil penalty of $1,000 for the reasons stated herein;
4. Awarding economic relief to Dive team members deprived of
premium pay, plus interest at the statutory rate;
5. Ordering the City restore the Dive Team unless and until it completes
any necessary bargaining under PECBA;
6. Awarding such further relief as would further the purposes and
policies of the PECBA.