L 2 .3 :

Grievance and Arbitration

Procedures in

State and Local Agreements

U.S. Department of Labor 

Bureau of Labor Statistics 

1975

Bulletin 1833
Grievance and Arbitration

Procedures in

State and Local Agreements

U.S. Department of Labor

Peter J. Brennan, Secretary

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Julius Shiskin, Commissioner

1975

Bulletin 1833

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, GPO Bookstores, or

BLS Regional Offices listed on inside back cover. Price $1.25

Make checks payable to Superintendent of Documents.

Stock Number 029-001-01371

Catalog Number L 2.3:1833

☆ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1975 0 -5 8 3 -6 7 2 (60)

Preface

This bulletin is one of a series of studies by the Bureau of Labor Statistics dealing

with collective bargaining and labor-management relations in the public sector. It was

carried out with funds made available by the Labor-Management Services

Administration of the Department of Labor.

The Bureau conducted this study to provide detailed information on grievance and

arbitration procedures, two related and key provisions of public employee collective

bargaining agreements. It is a part of the Bureau’s series of studies of agreement

provisions at the Federal, State, and local level. Studies in progress examine various

contract provisions at the State and county level and those governing police and

firefighters.

This bulletin was prepared in the Division of Industrial Relations by Richard R.

Nelson, John H. Chase and Haney R. Pearson, Jr., under the direction of Leon E.

Lunden, Project Director.

Contents

Page

Chapter 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................................................... 1

Related s tu d ie s ............................................................................................................................................................... 1

Scope and method of the s t u d y .................................................................................................................................. 1

General characteristics of the agreements studied ................................................................................................ 2

Level of governm ent.......................................................................................................................................... 2

Regional distributibn ...................................................................................................................................... 2

Size of bargaining u n i t ...................................................................................................................................... 2

Agreement term .............................................................................................................................................. 2

Employee organization...................................................................................................................................... 2

Occupational g r o u p s .......................................................................................................................................... 2

Agency function ............................................................................................................................................... 3

Chapter 2. The grievance p ro ced u re...................................................................................................................................... 4

Prevalence of negotiated and agency p roced u res..................................................................................................... 4

Scope and definition of negotiated grievance procedures .................................................................................... 5

Specific inclusions ....................................................................................................................................................... 6

Specific exclusions ....................................................................................................................................................... 6

Access to grievance p r o c e d u r e s.................................................................................................................................. 7

Initiation of a grievance .............................................................................................................................................. 9

Union r o l e ........................................................................................................................................................................ 9

Grievance co m m itte es.......................................................................................................................................................11

Procedural steps ............................................................................................................................................................... 12

Chapter 3. Grievance resolution procedures ......................................................................................................................... 15

Factfinding ....................................................................................................................................................................... 15

M ed ia tio n ............................................................................................................................................................................16

Arbitration ........................................................................................................................................................................18

Scope of arb itra tio n .............................................................................................................................................. 18

Referral to a rb itra tio n .......................................................................................................................................... 19

Type of arbitration machinery ......................................................................................................................... 20

Selection of ad hoc a rb itrator............................................................................................................................. 20

Selection of permanent arbitrators.....................................................................................................................21

Outside agency used in the selection p r o c e ss.................................................................................................... 23

Arbitration costs .................................................................................................................................................. 23

Status of arbitrator’s d e c is io n ............................................................................................................................. 25

lim its on authority to award back p a y .............................................................................................................25

Final level of decision other than arbitration .............................................................................................................26

Chapter 4. Official time, time limits, and withdrawal of grievan ces....................................................................................28

Official t i m e ....................................................................................................................................................................... 28

Time limits ....................................................................................................................................................................... 29

Withdrawal of the grievance ..........................................................................................................................................32

Chapter 5. Appeals from disciplinary action 33
Contents—Continued

Tables: Page

1. State and local agreements by region and level of government, 1972-73 ................................................... 35

2. State and local agreements by size of bargaining unit and level of government, 1972-73 ....................... 35

3. Duration of State and local agreements by level of government, 1972—73 35

4. Occupational coverage of State and local agreements in grievance and arbitration

study by employee organization, 1972-73 36

5. State and local agreements by agency function and level of government, 1972-73 36

6. Negotiated and agency grievance procedures in State and local agreements by level

of government, 1972-73 .............................................................................................................................. 37

7. Scope of grievance procedure in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73 37

8. Specific inclusions and exclusions of grievance procedures in State and local

agreements by level of government, 1972-73 38

9. Employee organization role in grievance procedures by level of government and

employee organization in State and local agreements, 1972-73 ........................................................... 39

10. Selected grievance resolution procedures in State and local agreements by level of

government, 1972-73 40

11. Arbitration referral procedures in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73 40

12. Type of arbitration machinery in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73 41

13. Method of selecting arbitrators in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73 42

14. Status of arbitrator’s decision in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73 43

15. Level of decision when other than arbitration in State and local agreement grievance

procedures by level of government, 1972-73 ................................................................... . . 43

16. Personnel eligible for official time allowances in State and local agreements,

1972-73 44

17. Time limits in grievance and arbitration procedures in State and local agreements by

level of government, 1972-73 ..................................................................................................................... 44

18. Effect of management non-observance of time limits in State and local agreements by

level of government, 1972-73 ..................................................................................................................... 45

Appendixes:

A. Identification of clauses ..................................................................................................................................... 46

B. Complete grievance and arbitration provisions ................................................................................................ 55

C. Grievance form ...................................................................................................................................................... 58
Chapter 1 Introduction

Grievance and arbitration procedures are generally

accepted as peaceful alternatives to work stoppages in

the settlement of disputes which may arise in applying

and interpreting the collective bargaining agreement.

Their systematic approach to employee complaints and

their ability to carry appeals to successively higher levels,

have avoided the bitterness, the frustrations, and the

conflicts that otherwise would arise in their absence.

There is less likelihood, as a result, of a strike with its

accompanying lost income, halting of employer

operations, and strained relations which too often are

not repaired quickly.

In State and local government jurisdictions,

negotiated grievance and arbitration procedures assume

additional significance. Civil service complaint and

appeal systems—an alternative—may be perceived by

employees as management controlled; strikes, harsh

alternative that they are, may be limited by a public

opinion which opposes any interruption of government

services. More importantly, they are likely to be prohibited by law, carrying heavy penalties on individual

employees and their collective bargaining representatives. Thus it is not surprising that grievance and

arbitration procedures are among the first provisions

negotiated into contracts following recognition of the

employee organization.

Related studies

The Bureau has published a number of other studies

dealing in whole or in part with grievance and arbitration

procedures. Among public employee studies, “Negotiation Impasse, Grievance and Arbitration in Federal

Agreements” (BLS Bulletin 1661) was published in

1970. For the private sector, “Major Collective Bargaining Agreements: Grievance Procedures” (BLS Bulletin

1425-1) was issued in 1964 and “Major Collective

Bargaining Agreements: Arbitration Procedures” (BLS

Bulletin 1425-6) in 1966. These examined negotiated

dispute settlement procedures in detail, and in a sense,

the present study is a companion piece, extending the

analysis to State and local agreements. Other public

sector agreement studies are more general in scope and

provide overall statistics and a few clauses illustrating

public sector grievance and arbitration procedures, but

none give the analysis in depth of the three bulletins just

cited.

Scope and method of the study

For this study, the Bureau examined all 655 State

and local collective bargaining agreements and related

documents covering 50 or more employees in its file.

Most of the agreements and documents were due to

expire in 1973 or during the last quarter of 1972. The

tabular material reflects these data. However, for the

purposes of illustration, many of the clauses used in this

bulletin as illustrations have been updated. The expiration dates of the contracts from which they have been

culled are 1974 and later.

The Bureau’s 655 agreements covered 870,685

workers employed by various State, county, and municipal jurisdictions as well as school and other special

districts and authorities. Agreements from 45 States and

the District of Columbia are represented.

In addition to collective bargaining agreements similar

to those found in private industry, other documents

such as memoranda of understanding or ordinances

which clearly indicate that they were the result of

bilateral negotiations are also included in the study. This

approach understates the effect of unions and associations in the negotiating process. For example, informal

efforts to modify labor relations policies often result in

city ordinances being passed or executive orders being

issued which do not record employee organization

involvement. Such ordinances and executive orders are

not considered to be within the scope of the study.

The data presented reflect the Bureau’s understanding

of the written provisions and not necessarily that of the

parties. Agreement language is elusive and complicated,

and often requires interpretation through the arbitration

process. What is carried out in practice, furthermore,

may differ from contract language. Under these circumstances, the Bureau can only analyze the specific

language appearing in contracts, and hope that it closely

reflects the rules under which the parties operate.
General characteristics of the agreements studied

Level o f government. The largest group of agreements in

the study, almost two-fifths, were negotiated with

municipal governments and include nearly one-third of

total worker coverage. (See table 1.) Special districts,

primarily school districts, account for over one-quarter

of the agreements and the same proportion of workers.

The remaining contracts were negotiated at either the

county or State level. Of these, State contracts are few

in number, but contain the second largest worker

coverage.

Regional distribution. Following the pattern of earlier

Bureau State and local studies, the majority of agreements are from the Middle Atlantic, East North Central,

and Pacific regions. (See table 1.) Together these regions

include 70 percent of the agreements and nearly 85

percent of the total worker coverage. The East North

Central region, an area traditionally strong in both

public and private sector unionism, produced the most

agreements, but the Middle Atlantic States, with several

large New York City and State agreements, alone

accounted for over half of the total worker coverage.

Again as in previous Bureau studies, the East and West

South Central regions proved to be areas of little

collective bargaining activity.

Size o f bargaining unit. Most of the bargaining units are

relatively small, with the median contract covering only

267 employees. Nearly four-fifths of the agreements

covered fewer than 1,000 employees and over two-thirds

covered less than 500. (See table 2.) State governments,

where contracts are often jurisdiction-wide, reported the

highest proportion of large agreements, followed by

special districts, including a number of major teacher

and transit authority contracts. The largest single agreement was for New York City, and covered 120,000

employees.

Agreement term. Similar to the findings in earlier Bureau

studies, the agreements studied are generally of shorter

duration than those negotiated in the private sector,

where most are in effect for 3 years or longer. Nearly

three-quarters of the public contracts were negotiated

for terms of 2 years or less, although over one-third of

the workers were covered by contracts lasting 3 years or

more. (See table 3.) More than one-quarter of the

agreements have durations of odd lengths. This often

results from extended bargaining, which moves the

effective date of the new contract into a fiscal or

calendar year which has already begun.

Employee organization. The American Federation of

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

(AFL-CIO) has more agreements than any other employee organization in the study; it also represents the

largest number of employees. It is 1 of 4 employee

organizations which acts as bargaining agent for employees under at least 40 of the agreements:

Unions and associations Agreements Workers

All unions and associations ........ 655 870,685

State, County and Municipal

Employees (AFSCME) (AFL-CIO) ____ 211 358,008

Fire Fighters (IAFF) (AFL-CIO).........

National Education Association

........ 59 18,325

(NEA) (Ind.) ...................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

........ 54 81,601

(AFL-CIO)................................................ 47 31,070

These three unions and one association have more

than 56 percent of all agreements and the same

percentage of all employees.

Unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO have 62 percent

of both the contracts studied and the workers represented by them. (See table 4.) More than one-half of

these were negotiated by the American Federation of

State, County and Municipal Employees. Associations

negotiated 35 percent of the agreements and represent

37 percent of the employees covered.

Occupational groups. Occupational coverage falls into

three general categories: Agreements representing a

single occupation; those involving combinations of two

or more occupations; and general coverage agreements,

which are negotiated with all or nearly all classes of

employees within a given government or agency jurisdiction. (See table 4.) More than two-thirds of the

agreements, covering nearly one-half of the workers,

were negotiated with single occupational groups. Those

with general coverage include several large contracts, and

account for almost a quarter of the agreements, representing 44 percent of total employment.

The largest number of single occupation contracts

involve blue-collar workers, mostly organized by AFLCIO unions. There are fewer agreements covering professional and technical employees, but these contracts

cover the largest number of employees, most frequently

represented by associations, and found most often in

school districts. Police and firefighter agreements are

evenly split between associations and AFL-CIO unions,

with virtually all firefighters being organized by the

International Association of Fire Fighters (AFL-CIO),

and most law, enforcement employees belonging to

associations. Contracts with general coverage primarily

involve municipal workers represented by AFL-CIO

affiliates.
Agency function. The agreements studied are spread

through a wide number of State and local agencies. (See

table 5.) Most often they cover employees of boards of

education, but in terms of the number of employees

multiple agency agreements predominate, covering twofifths of all the workers in the study. Other agencies

with a significant worker coverage include law enforcement and correctional institutions, social welfare, fire

protection, health and medical services, public works,

and public transportation.
Chapter 2. The Grievance Procedure

Prevalence o f negotiated and agency procedures. Provisions for the processing of employee, and in some

cases, union or employer grievances are found in 9 out

of 10 agreements. (See table 6.) While this frequency is

below the almost universal prevalence of such provisions

found in private sector agreements,1 it is measurably

above the 82 percent rate found in Federal agreements.2

Although the majority of agreements appear to be the

result of bilateral negotiations, a few contain contract

language referring instead to specific laws or regulations

governing grievances. While the inclusion in the agreement of these latter provisions may indicate that the

employee organization involved has accepted them, they

are considered, in this study to be agency rather than

negotiated procedures:

(1) Procedures governing grievances by employees

shall be in accordance with Section 11:13 of the

Municipal Code of the City of Plainfield and

amendments thereto.

(2 ) ' All disputes relating to the interpretation or

application of any of the provisions of this

contract which may arise between the parties

hereto, shall be governed and controlled by, and in

accordance with, the grievance procedures set

forth in Mayoral Executive Order No. 52, dated

September 29, 1967, Section 8, Grievance Procedures: Sub-sections a, c, d, and e, or any

amendment thereto.

Several agreements included more information on the

applicable regulations by providing greater detail or by

attaching the regulation to the agreement as an appendix:

(3) The grievance procedure shall be that established by the St. Louis County Civil Service

Commission, a copy of which, entitled “Grievance

Procedure Manual”, is attached hereto and marked

Exhibit A.

‘ A 1973 BLS study of 1,300 private sector agreements

covering 1,000 workers or more found that all but 17 contained

grievance procedures. See “Characteristics of Agreements

Covering 1,000 Workers or More, Jul. 1,1972” (BLS Bull. 1784)

1973, table 67, p. 65.

2 “Collective Bargaining Agreements in the Federal Service,

late 1971” (BLS Bull. 1789) 1973, table 29, page 71.

Seemingly unilateral grievance regulations, or modifications of them, however, may have resulted, in fact,

from collective bargaining. In some instances, for example, amendments to grievance regulations are incorporated into contracts:

(4) The procedure with respect to the adjustment

of grievances shall be that set forth in the

Grievance Procedure of the County of Tioga

adopted by the Board of Supervisors by Resolution No. 102-63, September 16, 1963, except that

there shall be added thereto the following additional provision:

Within 20 days from the filing of the decision

of the Grievance Committee, either the County or

the CSEA may file notice with the Clerk of the

County Legislature that it requires submission of

the issue or issues so decided to an arbitration

board. In such event, within 2 weeks thereafter,

the Chairman of the Grievance Committee and the

President of CSEA shall each designate an arbitrator, who shall be a resident of the County, but

neither an official or employee of the County, nor

an official or member of CSEA. As expeditiously

as possible thereafter, the two arbitrators thus

selected shall select a third arbitrator, who likewise

shall not be an official or employee of the County,

nor an official or member of the CSEA, but need

not be a resident of the County, and the third

arbitrator thus selected shall become Chairman of

the arbitration board.

The arbitration board shall then give notice to

both parties of the time and place where a hearing

on the matter or matters in dispute will be

conducted. Such hearing and any adjourned hearings shall be held during normal working hours,

Monday through Friday, unless the parties otherwise consent. The employee asserting a grievance,

his representative, and any witnesses called to

testify, shall be excused from duty as required to

participate in the arbitration hearings, without loss

of salary, wage or vacation, sick leave or personal

leave allowance.

The arbitration board shall render its decision

within twenty days after the conclusion of the

hearing or hearings and file the same with the

Clerk of the County Legislature and transmit

copies to the Chairman of the Grievance Committee and the President of CSEA. Such decision shall

be final and binding on all parties.

(5) The City agrees to amend Rule XIV of the

Personnel Rules and Regulations to allow advisory
arbitration to be invoked by either party to a

grievance if they so desire. The City shall consult

with each employee organization prior to the

adoption of the proposed amendment by the City

Council.

In several agreements, employees are allowed the

option of processing grievances through either the

negotiated or the agency procedure. The choice, once

made, is final in almost all cases. The employee may be

required to submit a waiver of rights so as to formalize

his choice:

(6) A Civil Service employe, may process his

grievance through either the Civil Service appeal

procedure or the contract grievance procedure. If

an appeal is filed under the Civil Service appeal

procedure, then the contract grievance procedure

shall cease and shall not be permitted to be

reinstituted. If an appeal is filed under the Civil

Service appeal procedure, the employe shall not be

entitled to institute proceedings under the contract grievance procedure, all rights to so do being

waived by the exercise of an option by the

employe to utilize the Civil Service procedure.

(7) In no case shall the employee be permitted to

appeal any grievance through both the Civil

Service Board and the grievance and arbitration

procedure. . . .

. . . If the election is for the grievance and

arbitration procedure it shall include a written

waiver of his right of appeal to Civil Service and to

the courts.........

Some agreements allow exceptions to the waiver

requirement for certain types of disputes such as

disciplinary actions:

(8) Notwithstanding State Personnel Board Merit

System Rules 356.28.010 through 356.28.500

involving appeal rights of state employees, this

grievance procedure provided below shall be available to all employees covered by this agreement

provided that grievances involving dismissals, suspensions, demotions, or abandonment shall be

submitted to the level of command having authority-to act.

Use of the grievance procedure in disciplinary

actions, shall not void the responsibility or right of

those employees covered by the Merit System

Rules to appeal to the State Personnel Board in a

timely manner.

Where workers are represented by more than one

union, each with its own agreement and grievance

procedure, the employee may select from among the

negotiated procedures:

(9) It is understood that, so long as employees of

the employer are able to become members of

several employee organizations, they may bring a

grievance under any one of the grievance procedures provided in the labor agreements between

the employer and the organizations to which they

belong. However, it is agreed between the parties

hereto that, once a member of the union has

elected as his grievance remedy the grievance

procedure provided herein, such election shall be

final, and said member will pursue his grievance to

its conclusion, thereafter, pursuant to this Grievance Procedure and* the Arbitration Procedure of

Article VIII only.

A small number of agreements without a grievance

procedure, allow for their negotiation at a later date:

(10) Grievance Procedure. City agrees to meet and

consult with Association on a grievance procedure.

If, as a result of such consultation, City and

Association agree on a procedure, City and Association agree to sign said procedure.

The existence of a grievance procedure is often given

as justification for including a no-strike provision:

(11) Since adequate grievance procedures are provided in this agreement, the UNO agrees that it

will not engage in, encourage, sanction or suggest

strikes, slowdowns, mass resignations or mass

absenteeism, or other similar action which would

involve suspension of work that may disturb or

interfere with the orderly operation of the Medical

Center.

Scope and definition o f negotiated grievance procedures.

Grievance procedures in State and local agreements

begin, most often, with a preamble stating the purpose

of the procedure, followed by a definition of what

constitutes a grievance or what kind of complaints can

be processed under the procedure. (See table 7.) The

statement of purpose is fairly uniform throughout the

agreements and refers to the desirability of settling the

dispute with the least possible disruption of the workplace:

(12) The purpose of the grievance procedure shall be

to settle all grievances between the City and the

Union and employees as quickly as possible, so as

to insure efficiency and promote employees’

morale . . .

(13) The purpose of the grievance procedure shall be

to settle employee grievances on as low an

administrative level as possible, so as to insure

efficiency and maintain morale within the Fire

Department . . .

In general usage, any complaint of an employee

relating to his job, pay, working conditions, or treatment, may be considered a grievance. All such complaints, however, are not always included within the

scope of a negotiated grievance procedure. Definitions of

the scope of the procedure are included in over 90

percent of the grievance provisions studied. More than

four-fifths of the agreements, representing 91 percent of
the workers covered, limit use of the formal procedure

to those issues involving the interpretation or application

of the agreement:

(14) The parties agree that the prompt and just

settlement of grievances is of mutual interest and

concern. Only matters involving the interpretation,

application or enforcement of the terms of this

agreement shall constitute a grievance under the

provisions as set forth below.

(15) A grievance is defined as, and limited to, an

alleged violation of a specific provision of this

agreement.

The remaining 19 percent of the agreements are more

general in nature, indicating that any and all disputes

could be processed under the procedure:

(16) Any difference or misunderstanding which may

arise between the employer and an employee or

the employer and the union shall be handled as

follows: . . .

Nearly one half of the procedures specify that their

scope covers the interpretation or application of the

agreements, but could include other disputes as well:

(17) Any grievances or dispute which may arise

between the parties, including the application,

meaning or interpretation of this agreement, shall

be settled in the following manner: . . ,

(18) A grievance is defined as a contention of

misapplication, violation, or inequitable application of State Civil Service Law, State Personnel

Board Merit System rules, Compensation Plan,

Personnel Board Policies, articles of this agreement, and those Highway Department policies and

operating procedures pertaining to personnel.

Specific inclusions. Nearly one-fifth of the provisions

containing a definition of the scope, list specific issues

that would be included. (See table 8.) The subjects cited

generally are presented as part of the definition with the

implied understanding that subjects not mentioned

would not be grievable. Most frequently included are

wages, hours, working conditions, and disciplinary

actions:

(19) Should any difference arise between the employer and the union as to the meaning and

application of this agreement, or as to any

question relating to wages, hours and working

conditions, failure to negotiate in good faith, they

shall be settled under the provisions of this article.

(20) A claim by an employee, groups of employees,

or the union that there has been a violation,

misinterpretation or misapplication of any provision of this agreement or any protest against

disciplinary action, shall be deemed a grievance

under this contract and will be subject to the

grievance procedure hereinafter provided.

In a few cases, a lengthy list of the items subject to

the procedure is provided:

(21) Matters subject to grievance procedure:

Full-time employees having probationary and permanent status may process a personal grievance on

one, or more than one, of the following grounds:

1. Improper application of rules, regulations and procedures.

2. Unfair treatment, including coercion,

restraint or reprisal.

3. Reduction in force action - lay-offs.

4. Promotion procedures implemented unfairly.

5. Classification of position.

6. Nonselection for training opportunities.

7. Discrimination because of race, religion, color, creed or national origin.

8. Any matter personally affecting an

employee’s working schedule, sick leave,

fringe benefits, retirement, holidays, performance rating, vacation, change in classification or salary.

Probationary employees may file grievance under

all of the above, but not as applied to their

performance rating or dismissal.

References to grievable matters could also be included in other articles of the agreement; for instance,

the safety clause could contain a specific authorization

to grieve:

(22) Should an employee complain that his work

requires him to be in unsafe or unhealthy situations, in violation of acceptable safety rules, the

matter shall be presented immediately to the

Board (or department head—in the event that the

employee’s Appointing Authority is not a Board

or Commission) having jurisdiction. If the matter

is not adjusted satisfactorily, it may be processed

according to the grievance procedure.

Specific exclusions. Particular disputes are specifically

excluded in only 8 percent of the agreements with

grievance procedures. As with the inclusions just discussed, these are generally found as part of the grievance

definition. However, it is not uncommon to find them

referred to in the section of the contract to which the

exclusion applied. Disciplinary action is the only significantly frequent exclusion, probably because disciplinary

action often is the subject of a special expedited

procedure or a special agency procedure.3 Its exclusion

3 See pp. 33 below for a discussion of special procedures in

disciplinary cases.
could appear either alone or in combination with other

exclusions:

(23) All differences, disputes and grievances, other

than discipline and discharge cases, hereinafter

provided for, between the parties arising out of or

by virtue of the within collective labor agreement

shall be disposed of in the following manner: . ..

(24) The purpose of this article is to define procedures whereby an individual employee may seek

adjustment of a personal complaint or grievance

arising out of individual working conditions or job

relations. These procedures do not apply to

grievances resulting from the following actions:

a. Classification

b. Discrimination

c. Reduction-in-Force

d. Demotion

e. Nonselection for promotion from a list

of qualified eligibles

Many agreements further limit the scope by prohibiting any resolution of a dispute that would make

changes in existing policy, rules, or contract provisions:

(25) The grievance and arbitration procedure shall

not be used to change any provisions of this

agreement, any provisions of the personnel code,

municipal ordinances, or filed for the purpose of

getting an established policy, standard, or procedure changed.

Access to grievance procedures. Grievance provisions, as

a rule, establish procedures setting forth the initiation

and processing of such actions. While most agreements

do not limit the use of the procedure to any person,

group, or organization, a number exclude probationary

or temporary employees:

(26) The grievance procedure is available to all

nurses in the unit with the exception of cases

involving nurses who are discharged during the

probationary period.

(27) It is agreed by and between the parties that any

employee covered by this agreement working in a

probationary status may be discharged at the sole

discretion of the County and shall not have the

right to such relief pursuant to the grievance

procedure contained herein.

On the other hand, some agreements specifically

include probationary or temporary employees, although

they are not always afforded full protection:

(28) An individual working on a temporary appointment (under the provisions of chapter 3 1 of the

General Laws) may process a grievance under the

terms of this agreement.

(29) The above procedure shall apply to temporary

employees who have been continuously employed

by the employer in the same position for six (6)

months or more. Provided, however, that in these

matters the decision of the arbitrator shall not be

final and binding upon the parties but shall be

advisory only.

Management, as well, might be allowed to process

disputes through the grievance procedure. Such complaints could be filed against an employee, group of

employees, or the employee organization. Separate

procedures are often stipulated, since the regular system

calls for taking the grievance through ascending levels of

management:

(30) Grievances may also be filed by management

with Local 900, including but not limited to any

of the following reasons:

1. matters concerning the interpretation

or application of the particular clauses

of this agreement;

2. abuse of collective bargaining process

and understanding about the contract.

Such grievance must be presented in writing by the

City Manager, or his designate, to the President of

Local #900. The President of Local #900 shall

investigate and respond within 5 days.

(31) Should the City feel aggrieved concerning the

conduct of any employee or group of employees

or the union, which conduct is controlled by this

contract, adjustment shall be sought as follows:

(A) The City, acting through the Mayor or his

designated re presen tative(s), shall submit

such grievance in writing to the president of

the union setting forth the nature of the

grievance. Within 5 working days after receipt of such grievance, said president and

representatives of the union shall arrange to

and shall meet with representatives of the

City for the purpose of adjusting or resolving

such grievance . . .

(B) If such grievance is not resolved to the

satisfaction of the City within 7 days after

such meeting, the City, acting through the

Mayor or his designated representative (s),

may submit such grievance in writing, within

7 days thereafter, to the executive board of

the union by means of a letter addressed to

the secretary of the union. Within 7 days

after said secretary receives such letter, said

executive board shall, if necessary, make

their recommendation to the membership of

the union, and said membership shall, at its

next regular meeting or at a special meeting

called for such purpose, take such action as

is deemed necessary to dispose of the grievance.

(C) If such grievance is not resolved to the

satisfaction of the City by the union within

35 days after said Secretary receives such

letter, the City, acting through the Mayor or

his designated representative (s) may within

10 days thereafter, submit the dispute to

arbitration by the Connecticut State Board
of Mediation and Arbitration. Said Board

shall hear and act on such dispute in

accordance with its rules and render a

decision which shall be final and binding on

all parties.

(D) The time limits provided for herein may be

extended by the agreement of the parties.

(32) The foregoing grievance procedure shall not

preclude the right of the Springfield School

Committee or the Superintendent to institute a

grievance against any employee in the bargaining

unit or the Association at the Step 3 level. In such

event, at least 5 working days’ notice in writing

shall be given to the Association of the subject

matter of the grievance to be taken up at a

meeting.

If the matter is not settled to the satisfaction of

the School Committee, the following procedure

may be followed by the Springfield School Committee:

If at the end of the 30 calendar days next

following presentation at the Step 3 level, the

grievance shall not have been resolved to the

satisfaction of the School Committee, and if the

grievance shall involve the interpretation or application of any provision of this contract, the

School Committee may, if it feels that the

grievance is justified under the terms of the

contract, by giving written notice to the Association within the 20 working days next following

conclusion of such period of 30 calendar days,

present the grievance for arbitration; in which

event the Association and the School Committee

shall forthwith submit the grievance to the Board

of Conciliation and Arbitration for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, hereinafter called the

Board, for disposition. The Board shall hold

hearings promptly and, unless extended by mutual

agreement, shall issue a decision not later than 30

calendar days from the date of the closing of the

hearings. The Board’s decision shall be in writing

and shall set forth the findings of fact, reasoning

and conclusions on the issues submitted.........The

decision of the Board shall be submitted to the

School Committee and to the Association and

shall. . . be binding upon the School Committee,

the Association and the aggrieved employee.

Should a number of employees find that they have a

common grievance, the time and expense of processing

each grievance separately could be avoided by processing

them as a group grievance or as a representative case:

(33) In the event that employees have a group

grievance, it shall be sufficient if one employee or

their steward or chief steward submits the grievance on behalf of all named and similarly affected

employees. A group grievance shall be only one in

which the fact questions and the provisions of the

agreement alleged to be violated are the same as

they relate to each and every employee in the

group.

(34) Where one or more grievances involve a similar

issue, those grievances may be withdrawn without

prejudice pending the disposition of the appeal of

a representative case.

If one of the employees subject to the same

circumstances as other grieving employees, chose not to

grieve the issue, the union, in one instance, could do so

in his name without his approval:

(35) If, in the judgment of the Representative

Council, or its designee, a grievance affects a group

or class of teachers, the Council, or its designee,

may process such a grievance as though it were an

individual grievance. In such a case, the Association may process a grievance for all persons

concerned, even though an individually aggrieved

person may not wish to do so.

Informal attempts by employees to resolve their

problems are effectively ruled out in certain provisions.

These state that the grievance procedure is to be the

only method by which disputes are to be brought to the

attention of management:

(36) For the purpose of the parties of this agreement, a grievance shall be considered a dispute

between the parties concerning wages, hours, and

conditions of employment. The union and the

City agree that the City and chief of police will

not recognize a grievance or matter of personal

working conditions presented by an employee not

in accordance with the procedures hereby established. The union agrees that no union member

shall bring any matter personally to the chief of

police, management, or the City Council, but shall

follow the procedure outlined below.

Ordinarily, grievances occurring prior to the effective

date of the agreement are specifically barred from the

procedure:

(37) Any incident which occurred or failed to occur

prior to the effective date of this agreement shall

not be the subject of any grievance hereunder.

Employees having grievances which occur between

the expiration of one agreement and the effective date

of the next could thus find themselves without the

protection of a grievance procedure:

(30) The grievance procedures of this agreement

shall not be applicable to grievances arising in the

period between the termination of this agreement

and the effective date of its successor.

If the grievance, however, occurs during the life of

the contract, but is not settled before the agreement

terminates, contract provisions commonly allow regular

processing to continue:

(38) Any grievance filed during the life of this

agreement shall be processed through the steps of
this procedure regardless of whether such time

required may go beyond the expiration date of

this document.

(39) If a grievance based upon an event occurring

during the term of this agreement remains unresolved at the expiration hereof and is then

submitted to arbitration, the substantive provisions of this agreement shall be controlling upon

the arbitrator.

Initiation o f a grievance. If an employee has a grievance,

his first step, in almost every procedure, is to take the

problem to his immediate supervisor for an informal

discussion. In about 2 out of 3 cases, the employee is

required to make this initial complaint within a given

period from the occurrence of the action leading to the

grievance or from the time the employee became aware

of the problem:

(40) Any grievance arising in a department shall be

presented orally to the department head by the

employee involved with or without his area representative, as the employee desires. In this step, the

grievance shall be fully and thoroughly discussed

by the parties, who agree to make every effort to

settle the grievance in this step.

(41) The aggrieved employee shall take up the

grievance with his immediate supervisor within 5

days of its occurrence. The supervisor shall attempt to adjust the matter at that time ....

Settlement at this point would, of course, be desirable for both management and the employee involved.

However should the answer at this informal stage be

considered unsatisfactory, the employee could then file

a formal grievance by stating his complaint in writing:

(42) A grievance may be presented either orally or

in writing at this step of the grievance procedure.

If the grievance is presented orally to the supervisor and is not satisfactorily settled, it must be

reduced to writing . . .

Formal grievances as a rule, are submitted on a

standardized form. Agreement provisions may include

copies of such forms (see appendix C), paraphrase them,

or outline the information to be included where a form

is not used:

(43) Step I Any employee or group of employees

having a grievance shall notify their steward. The

steward shall discuss the grievance with the foreman and then prepare and present to the designated Electric Utility superintendent in the plant,

shop or work location involved a written “Notice

of Grievance” with copies to the Electric Utility

manager and the union’s business agent, setting

forth so far as may be applicable.

A. The nature of the grievance and the circumstances out of which it arose.

B. The remedy or correction the Electric Utility is requested to make, and

C. The section or sections of this agreement, if

any relied upon or claimed to have been

violated.

(44) In reducing a grievance to writing, the following information must be stated with reasonable

clearness: The exact nature of the grievance, the

act or acts of commission or omission, the exact

date of the act or acts of commission or omission,

the identity of the party or parties who claim to

be aggrieved, the identity of the party or parties

alleged to have caused the grievance, the specific

provisions of this agreement that are alleged to

have been violated, and the remedy which is

sought.

Some agreements specify who is to receive copies of

the written forms:

(45) An employee having a grievance shall state his

grievance in writing on the grievance form mutually adopted for such use by the parties to this

agreement. The grievance shall be prepared in

quintuplicate, and all copies shall be signed, by the

aggrieved employee. A copy shall be sent to the

Assistant Superintendent for business, a copy to

the Assistant Superintendent of Personnel, a copy

to the School Lunch Supervisor, a copy to the

chairman of the Association’s Grievance Committee and the aggrieved employee shall keep one

copy.

A few agreements call for the joint preparation of

forms.

(46) Forms for filing grievances, serving notices,

taking appeals, making reports and recommendations, and other necessary documents shall be

prepared jointly by the County and the union and

given appropriate distribution so as to facilitate

the operation of the grievance procedure.

Union role. Many grievance clauses specify a continuing

role for the employee organization in the day-to-day

operation of the procedure, either in initiating or

processing complaints. Close to one-fourth of the agreements having grievance procedures, covering almost

two-fifths of the employees, specifically permit the

employee organization itself to file grievances. (See table

9.)

(47) The City recognizes that the union reserves the

right to grieve, in accordance with the procedure

hereinafter provided, when action taken by the

city may be claimed, reasonably and sensibly, to

be contrary to a specific limitation, set forth in

this agreement, of the rights of the city.

Union initiation often involves a specific problem or

situation. The procedure, for example, can be used, by

the employee organization to object to any special
arrangement made between the employer and an employee which it feels runs counter to the terms of the

agreement. It can grieve when an issue involves a class of

employees rather than an individual. The procedure also

can be used over disputes arising from the classification

of new jobs. Resolution of the dispute can be expedited

by starting action at one of the later steps of the

procedure:

(48) If there is a breach of any provision of this

agreement affecting a group of employees, or if

the breach of any provision of this agreement is

the result of an agreement reached between the

employer and an employee without the approval

of the union involved, the union shall have the

right to take up such breach with or without the

consent of the employees or employee involved.

(49) When a new job is placed in a unit and cannot

be properly placed in an existing classification, the

employer will establish a classification and rate

structure to apply. In the event the union does not

agree that the description and rate are proper, the

union shall have the right to submit the matter

into the grievance procedure at the second step.

More importantly, the union represents members

processing their individual grievances through the multistep procedure. Representation is specifically included in

more than 65 percent of the agreements with grievance

procedures. (See table 9.) The union’s function consists

of two closely related responsibilities: First, serving as

the grievant’s agent and second, presenting the views of

the union at grievance meetings.

Of the agreements giving unions these functions,

more than 30 percent guarantee the union a responsible

role in the processing of grievances. The largest number

were negotiated at the municipal level and most frequently involved AFL-CIO affiliates. (See table 9.) The

union, in these instances, assumes almost total responsibility, and in most cases, presents the grievance at all

steps of the procedure:

(50) Any employee who is a member of the American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, who feels his rights have been

violated shall report the fact in writing within 3

working days to a steward. The steward, with or

without the employee present, shall take up the

grievance with the employee’s supervisor within 2

working days. The supervisor shall attempt to

adjust the matter and respond in writing to the

union within 3 working days. . . .

(51) All disputes or grievances which arise as to the

interpretation of or adherence to the provisions of

this memorandum shall be presented through the

following steps within 60 days of the alleged act or

incident:

1. The union grievance committee, within 5

days after receiving a grievance will make

every effort to adjust the grievance with the

appropriate employee’s supervisor. Such

grievance must be written and signed by the

employee. . .

In a few provisions, the union enters the dispute at a

later step in the procedure. At the lower steps, the

employee may process the grievance on his own:

(52) Step 4 — If the Administrative Head’s answer

is not satisfactory, the grievance will be referred to

the local president or chief steward who may

submit his appeal on an agenda to the employer’s

designated representative. A meeting between

three representatives of the local union and the

representatives designated by the employer will be

arranged to discuss the grievance or grievances

appearing on the agenda within 7 working days

from the date the agenda is received by the

employer, or his designated representative.

A number of other agreements provide the employee

organization with a lesser role. More than one-third of

the agreements setting forth the union’s role permit the

union either to express its views, attend grievance

meetings, or both. In some instances, it is necessary for

the employee organization to have permission from the

grievant:

(53) The employee may represent himself or designate a representative. In any case, the official

representative of the Association shall be notified

and may be present at all discussions of the

grievance matter without intervention by the

Association representative. . . .

(54) Any party in interest may be represented at all

stages of the grievance procedure by himself, or, at

his option, by a representative selected or approved by the FMBA, or by counsel of his choice.

When a fireman is not represented by the FMBA,

the FMBA shall have the right to be present and to

state its views at all stages of the grievance

procedure. If a fireman is not a member of the

FMBA, consent must be granted by said fireman in

order for a FMBA representative to be present.

The union’s right to be present is specifically mentioned in some provisions which allow the employee to

represent himself:

(8) The union as exclusive representative of Department employees is considered as the prime

representative of said employees in grievance

matters. However, an employee may represent

himself or select a representative.

The union shall be considered an interested

party to the proceedings in the event it is not

requested to represent the employee.

(34) . . . any individual employee, at any time, may

present grievances to the Chief of Police and have
the grievance adjusted without intervention of the

bargaining representative, if the adjustment is not

inconsistent with the terms of a collective bargaining contract or agreement then in effect; and

provided that the bargaining representative has

been given opportunity to be present at such

adjustment.

In other agreements, the role of the union is limited

to receiving notification that a grievance had been filed.

Such notification alerts the union so that it can assert a

more active part if it is deemed necessary to do so:

(6) The Employer agrees to notify the Association

whenever it receives a grievance from any employe

and to furnish the Association with a copy of each

written decision.

Agreements generally acknowledge that the union

can decline to process an employee’s grievance if it

determines that the grievance has no merit or has been

resolved to its satisfaction:

(55) At any step in this grievance procedure, the

Executive Board of the local union shall have the

final authority in respect to any aggrieved employee covered by this agreement to decline to

process further a grievance, complaint, difficulty

or dispute if, in the judgment of the Executive

Board, such grievance or dispute lacks merit or

lacks justification under the terms of this agreement, or has been adjusted or rectified under the

terms of this agreement to the satisfaction of the

union executive board.

(56) No provision in this agreement shall be interpreted to require the union to represent an

employee in any stage of the grievance procedure

if the union considers the grievance to be without

merit or in contradiction of any law or regulation.

While nearly 80 percent of the agreements having a

grievance procedure allow an employee to process his

own grievance, less than 14 percent permit an employee

to select a nonunion representative of his own choice.

(See table 9.) A few preclude a grievant from being

represented by another union, but allow the grievant to

choose any other representative. Again, the union often

retains the right to present its views at all steps of the

grievance procedure:

(57) Any party in interest may be represented at

levels II and III of the formal grievance procedure

by a person of his own choosing, except that he

may not be represented by a representative or by

an officer of any teacher organization other than

the Association. When a teacher is not represented

by the Association, the Association shall have the

right to be present and to state its views at all

stages of the procedure.

The right of the employee to process his own

grievance usually applies only to the point of arbitration,

thus reserving to the union any decision to proceed

further:

(58) Fees and expenses of the arbitrator shall be

borne equally by both parties. No individual

employee himself may invoke this Step 4.

(59) If the grievant is not satisfied with the disposition of his grievance at Step 3, he may, within five

working days after the decision is due, request in

writing that the union submit his grievance to

advisory arbitration. If the union deems the

grievance meritorious, it may demand advisory

arbitration within 10 working days after receipt of

the grievant’s request. If the union is not satisfied

with the disposition of the grievance at Step 3, it

may, in its own right, demand advisory arbitration

within 5 working days after the decision is due at

Step 3.

Grievance committees. Of the 28 percent of the agreements with procedures referring to employee organization grievance committees, most were negotiated with

AFL-CIO affiliates. Of the agreements with other organizations, most appeared to be confined to law enforcement and education employees. Committee provisions

usually contain details relating to functions, composition, and time allowances.

Grievance committees usually review employee complaints to determine if they have merit. If the grievance

is rejected, the grievant might process the grievance

without union support. However, the committee’s rejection could conceivably convince employees that their

complaints have no sound basis and therefore little

chance of success:

(60) Legitimacy of grievance. Within 10 days of receipt

of the grievance, the grievance committee shall

decide whether or not the LEA member has a

legitimate grievance. If the committee decides that

a legitimate grievance does not exist, it must then

notify the claimant. The claimant may then either

request a hearing with the grievance committee or

continue to process his claim without LEA support. If the committee decides there is a legitimate

grievance, it shall immediately submit a written

claim to the aggrieved person indicating the

support of the LEA and offering assistance at all

levels of this procedure.

(61) In any case where the grievance has not been

settled by the foregoing procedure, then the

employee should, in writing, bring it to the

attention of the Executive Committee of Local

1363. Said Executive Committee shall, within 5

days of the receipt of the grievance, arrange for

the employee to present his alleged grievance at a

meeting of a majority of the Executive Committee. It shall be the responsibility of the Executive

Committee to determine the justification of the

complaint.
If, in the judgment of the Executive Committee, the nature of the grievance justifies further

action, it shall, through the President or Vice

President of Local 1363, bring the grievance to the

attention of the Chief of the Fire Department.

The primary purpose of union grievance committees

is, of course, to adjust pending grievances, and in some

cases, to find procedures that will help to avoid recurring

disputes. Committees might even function as forums for

other existing or anticipated problems so as to create a

better labor-management relationship:

(62) . . . The purpose of grievance committee meetings will be to adjust pending grievances and to

discuss procedures for avoiding future grievances.

In addition, the committee may discuss with the

Chief of the Fire Department other issues which

would improve the relationship between the

parties.. . .

Most grievance committees enter the process at the

first stage where formal action is taken. This is usually

the point where informal attempts at settlement have

failed and the grievance is reduced to writing. The

procedures to be used by the committee are often

spelled out in detail:

(63) Standard grievance procedure agreed upon by

the employer and Local 275. It’s purpose to

promote harmony and efficiency among employees by providing for immediate settlement of

grievances without fear of discrimination.

1. A grievance committee of three members

shall be formed by Local 275; they will meet with

any person, or persons, designated by the employer.

2. All grievance material must be in writing

and signed, upon the triplicate form agreed to by

Local 275 and the employer.

3. All grievances shall be investigated within

ten (10) days of its filing, by the union committee,

to determine its validity.

4. The employer shall receive one copy of the

grievance form, Local 275 one copy, and the

employee to retain one copy.

5. Upon receipt by the person, or persons,

designated by the employer, a joint meeting with

the grievance committee shall be held.

6. The employee shall be informed in writing

as to the action taken on the grievance.

7. Any person directly involved in the grievance shall not act as a member of the joint

grievance committee.

8. The local union may use their Council

Representative as a member of the grievance

committee.

9. Employee grievances shall be handled

through this committee.

10. Every legal means available as specified in

Chapter 108, Laws of 1967 will be used in settling

grievances, including mediation and/or arbitration.

A number of provisions, on the other hand, employ

grievance committees at later stages of the procedure:

(64) In the event the grievance has not been

satisfactorily resolved in Step 2 hereof, an appeal

may be made by the union in writing to the

department or agency head within 10 calendar

days of the receipt of the Step 2 decision. The

department or agency head or his designee shall

meet with the union grievance committee for a

review of the grievance within 10 calendar days of

the receipt of the written appeal and shall issue a

written decision within 10 calendar days following

the meeting.

Grievance committees are usually composed of union

officers, the chief steward, and other elected or appointed representatives. A few agreements, however, specify

that the grievance committee shall be selected from a

membership seniority list. In almost all cases, grievance

committee members are allowed to perform their duties

without loss of pay:

(65) There shall be a grievance committee consisting

of the Chief Steward and two other members to be

selected by the union and certified in writing to

the employer. The employer shall meet whenever

necessary, at a mutually convenient time, with the

union grievance committee.

(66) The grievance committee shall be composed of

the president of the local, the chief steward,

another steward and Council No. 76 Representative. The Council No. 76 Representative may enter

the grievance and represent the employee or group

of employees at any step in the grievance procedure.

(67) Composition o f Grievance Committee. A grievance committee consisting of not more than five

non-teaching employees of the School Department

will be designated by the local union from the

seniority list referred to in Article III, Section 3.

Members of the grievance committee and stewards

shall be allowed to process grievances during

working hours without loss of pay.

Rights o f Employee and Grievance Committee.

Likewise, any employee involved in a grievance

shall have the right to take part at grievance

meetings which may occur during his working

hours without loss of pay. Members of the

grievance committee shall be permitted to visit

schools other than their own for the purpose of

investigating and/or processing grievances.

Procedural steps. Following informal meetings to resolve

an employee complaint, the dispute enters the formal

procedure. This consists of successive levels of appeal if

the employee or his representative remains dissatisfied.

Emphasis is upon early settlement and, as already noted,

may involve the active participation or presence of the

union representative. Various divisions within an agency
may have procedures with equal numbers of steps,

terminating in the same final appeals step. In the

subordinate units, however, different management representatives may be involved in the first or second step of

the procedure:

(68) The supervisory levels represented by steps in

the Grievance Procedures are generally defined as

follows:

DISTRICT STATIONS & CRIME PREVENTION

COMPANY

Step 1. Lieutenant

2. Captain

3. Supervising Captain (additional)

4. Chief of Police

5. Commission

TRAFFIC BUREAU

Step 1. Lieutenant

2. Captain of Traffic

3. Director of Traffic (additional)

4. Chief of Police

5. Commission

BUREAU OF INSPECTOR S

Step 1. Lieutenant

2. Captain of Inspectors

3. Chief of Inspectors (additional)

4. Chief of Police

5. Commission

HEADQUARTERS COMPANY

Step 1. Supervising Sergeant

2. Officer-In-Charge of Lieutenant

3. Director or Commanding Officer

(additional)

4. Chief of Police

5. Commission

Movement up the procedural appeal steps can be

accelerated where first line supervision determines that

the power to settle the grievance lies at higher levels. In

some instances, the employee can by-pass lower management and submit the grievance to the proper decision 

making level:

(69) If it is the judgment of any management

representative that he does not have the authority

to resolve the grievance, he may refer the grievance

to the next step in the procedure.

(70) Grievances filed by an employee individually or

through his representative shall be submitted to

the lowest level of supervision having authority to

adjudicate the grievance.

In a few education agreements, school boards having

the final authority to resolve grievances, are permitted to

intervene at earlier steps and to reverse previous management decisions:

(71) School Board Review: The school board reserves the right to review any decision issued under

level I or level II of this procedure provided the

school board or its representative notify the

parties of its intention to review within 10 days

after the decision has been rendered. In the event

the school board reviews a grievance under this

section, the school board reserves the right to

reverse or modify such decision.

Where circumstances warrant, the movement of a

dispute can be expedited through the various procedural

steps. In the case of group grievances, for example,

parties often can by-pass the first or second steps. In a

few instances an employee is permitted to take his

problem directly to the party alleged to have been the

cause of the grievance:

(72) Any grievance which concerns more than one

nurse may be filed at Step 2 of the above

procedure.

(73) Any grievance of a general nature affecting a

large group of employees may, at the option of the

Association, be filed at Step 3 of the grievance

procedure.

(22) Grievances may be processed directly with the

party whose action resulted in the grievance and in

such instances the previous steps of this grievance

procedure may be omitted.

(74) If a grievance arises from the action of authority higher than the principal of a school, the union

may present such grievance at the appropriate step

of the grievance procedure.

In those agreements which permit the union, employer, or both to initiate grievances, the processing

usually begins at the second or higher steps. Still others

permit steps to be by-passed for any reason, provided

both parties agree to do so. In a few instances, the

agreement to pass over steps has to be in writing. And in

exceptional cases, the parties might agree to return to a

prior step for reconsideration:

(75) Grievances initiated by the City shall bt -■iOcessed in the same manner, but they r..;a/ h*

initiated at either Step One, Two or Three.

(76) A grievance may be filed by an employee

starting in Step 1, or by the Association or the

City starting in Step 2, at any time within 30 days

following discovery of the facts giving rise to ihc

dispute.

(77) Any step of the grievance procedure may be

by-passed by mutual agreement, in writing.

(78) By mutual agreement, the grievance may revert

to a prior level for reconsideration.

A number of agreements inject a forma1 appeals 

board into the procedural steps, usually just before

movement to final resolution. In a sense, these boards

represent the last internal attempt to settle the dispute

before third party intervention would be invoked. All
are bipartite in composition, involving only representatives of employer and employee. The board is authorized

to hold hearings and call witnesses. It could issue a

decision, but it is not final and binding, unless accepted

by the grievant, or in some instances, unless the decision

is reached unanimously:

(79) (a) The appeal board shall consist of two (2)

representatives selected by the employer

and 2 representatives selected by the union.

The appeal board shall meet within 14

calendar days after receipt of the above

appeal notice by the employer and shall

render a decision within 7 calendar days

following such meeting, which decision shall

be final and binding upon the parties to this

agreement.

(b) In the event the appeal board above described is unable to arrive at a mutually

acceptable solution to the grievance within 7

days, either party hereto shall have the right

to submit such grievance to arbitration

through the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Voluntary Labor

Arbitration Rules, provided such submission

is made within 15 calendar days after the

meeting of the appeal board. If the grievance

has not been submitted to arbitration within

said 15 calendar day period, it shall be

considered as being withdrawn by the union.

(42) If the grievance is not satisfactorily settled . . . ,

the union may submit the appeal. . . to a hearing

before the Employees Appeal Board which has

been established by ordinance. The aggrieved party

may be represented at such hearing by one

member of the Executive Committee, counsel

and/or any other individual of the union’s own

choosing, who shall have the right to present

documentation, testimony, or question witnesses

in support of the appeal. The Employees Appeals

Board shall have the right to question witnesses

and include others in such hearing whom they feel

are concerned with the appeal. The place of such

hearing will be held at a suitable time and at a

location specified by the Employees Appeals

Board .. . and may be public at the aggrieved

parties option. The decision of the Employees

Appeals Board will be submitted, in writing . . .

If the grievance is not satisfactorily settled . .

the union may submit the dispute . . . to arbitration . . .
Chapter 3. Grievance Resolution Procedures

Nearly 84 percent of the agreements having grievance

procedures, covering 93 percent of the workers, include

provisions for settling disputes through third party

intervention, namely, factfinding, mediation, or arbitration. (See table 10.) Of the three, only arbitration is

final and binding; factfinding and mediation are intermediate procedures used to resolve a dispute before it

becomes necessary to invoke arbitration.1 Neither factfinding nor mediation are as common as arbitration. (See

table 10.) This low incidence is probably more attributable to the general acceptance of arbitration among

State and local governments than to any disenchantment

with either factfinding or mediation, which are almost

totally absent in private industry.

Factfinding. About 4 percent of the agreements having

grievance procedures provide for the use of factfinding.

(See table 10.) The factfinder, or board of factfinders,

by definition, seeks to separate the true events from the

layers of emotion that may cloud the issues and to

present them dispassionately, with or without recommendations, to the parties. By itself, factfinding does

not guarantee settlement as much as it facilitates it by

bringing to bear an impartial perspective that refocuses

attention of the parties back to the fundamental issues.

Among the 21 factfinding provisions, most provide

for a board or panel rather than for a single factfinder:

Agreements Workers

Total having factfinding.................. 21 12,804

Single factfinder............................................ 4 2,470

Factfinding board................... 13 10,041

Factfinder or board........................................ 4 293

Most boards are tripartite, providing for representatives

of the employer, the employee or union, and a neutral:

Agreements Workers

Total factfinding boards....................17 10,334

Bipartite............................................................ 3 1,475

Tripartite ....................................................... 10 8,566

No reference to composition........................... 4 293

1 In a few instances, factfinding and mediation appear to be

the final grievance resolution level. See pp. 26-27 below for a

discussion of these provisions.

As a rule, each party would appoint equal numbers to

the factfinding board. In the three agreements having

bipartite arrangements, the employer and union representatives then proceed to carry out their authority. In

tripartite boards, the representatives appointed by each

party ordinarily would choose a neutral third party to

occupy the chair:

(80) . . . The Committee shall consist of three members who are District Government employees, and

are selected as follows:

(1) One member, designated by the Director:

(2) One member, designated by the employee:

(3) One member, who shall be Chairman,

designated by the first two members. . .

If the two partisan members are unable to agree upon

an impartial chairman, the parties may then turn to an

outside organization, such as the American Arbitration

Association or a government mediation agency, for a list

of neutrals. The parties would then alternately strike a

name from the list until only one remains. On the other

hand, the parties could also leave the choice to the

discretion of the outside agency:

(81) Upon request of the grievant and the union, the

unresolved grievance will be referred to advisory

fact-finding. A single fact-finder will be used. If

the Board and union are unable to agree upon a

fact-finder within 7 days, a panel of 5 or 7 names

will be obtained from the American Arbitration

Association, and starting with the grievant the

parties shall alternately strike names until a single

name is left. If the individual selected as the

fact-finder is not available, other individuals will

be contacted in reverse order of their names having

been stricken from the list.

(82) The advisory panel shall consist of 3 persons,

one selected by the Mayor, one selected by the

union, and the two advisory panelists shall then

select a third mutual panelist who shall act as

Chairman of the advisory panel.

If the parties fail to select a chairman, they

shall request the State Mediation and Conciliation

Service to name one.

Most of the 21 provisions are silent on the factfinder's authority, but a few authorize him to call
witnesses, interrogate them, and accept briefs as well as

review records and documents:

(83) The union or the grievant may . . . appeal from

such decision to the impartial hearing officer.. . The impartial hearing officer shall conduct

a hearing on the grievance or grievances . . . At the

request of the impartial hearing officer, such

witnesses, records and other documentary evidence, as may be required, shall be produced . . .

(84) The committee shall review the appeal or

conduct a hearing . . . The Board committee shall

endeavor to ascertain all the pertinent facts in the

case and shall receive written statements by or on

behalf of the aggrieved, shall receive oral statements

by or on behalf of the aggrieved, shall receive oral

statements of both interested and disinterested parties, and shall interrogate persons presenting information in order to elicit all the pertinent facts. The

committee may request any employee of the school

district to be present other than the person who

considered the grievance in step 1. However, the

last condition shall not preclude such person from

giving evidence or statements.

The final authority of the factfinder or panel is

relatively weak. In all cases, the factfinder or panel files

a report with an individual empowered to make a

decision (usually a management official); and in most

cases, recommendations are included:

Agreements Workers

Total having factfinding..................21 12,804

Report limited to finding of fact. . . . . . . . . 4 1,800

Report includes recommendations............. 17 11,004

The influence of the panel or factfinder depends in

part upon the respect in which factfinding and its

participants are held by the final decisionmaker and

perhaps upon the politics of the situation. Theoretically,

the decisionmaker is free to accept or reject the report

and recommendations. In actuality, the decisionmaker is

not completely unrestricted. If the report and recommendations also go to union and employee, management’s decision may be influenced by its expectations of

how the other parties will react. The requirement that

the decisionmaker must justify his non-acceptance of the

report and recommendations in writing likewise affects

his freedom to decide. And if the findings and recommendation are made public, public opinion may influence the outcome:

(55) The advisory panel shall review the grievance

and within 20 days from date of appointment of

third member, recommend a solution to the Mayor

and City Council. The Mayor and City Council

shall render the final decision.

(85) The employee grievance appeals committee

shall study the record of the case and shall hold an

informal hearing.

The committee shall notify the appointing

officer, the grievant and/or his representative, in

writing, of its recommendation . . .

Upon receipt of the committee’s recommendation, the appointing officer shall make a final

decision in the matter and notify in writing all

parties . . . If the appointing officer does not

accept the committee’s recommendation, he shall

fully set forth in writing his reasons for such

non-acceptance .. .

(86) . .. The committee, after deliberate and

thorough review of all available testimony and

information, shall make its findings and recommendations to the parties in writing.

The findings and recommendations of the

advisory committee may be made public by either

party. The findings and recommendations of the

advisory committee are not binding upon either

party but shall serve as a basis for further good

faith efforts on the part of both parties to

negotiate and settle any remaining issue.

As table 10 shows, in most instances where factfinding is found, it is the only grievance resolution

procedure available to the parties. Thus the aggrieved

would have no recourse if he did not agree with

management’s final decision. However, a few provisions

permit the grievant to carry his appeal to arbitration.

Mediation. Mediation involves an attempt by a neutral

third party to facilitate grievance settlement by suggesting possible solutions to the problem or by advising

the parties. There is no final and binding decision, as in

the case of arbitration, nor is there a finding of facts and

recommendations. Full power remains with the parties

to solve their own problems, but the mediator may help

both to communicate and to overcome the impasse.

Arrangements for mediation were negotiated in only

5 percent of the grievance procedures. (See table 10.) In

about half, failure of the mediator to bring the parties to

agreement could result in referral of the dispute to

arbitration. In most instances, provisions permitting

mediation are brief, giving little detail of what would be

involved in the mediation process. There may only be a

requirement, for example, for one party to notify the

other of a request to mediate; or the parties may agree

to waive mediation in preference to arbitration; or the

request may have to be in writing:

(87) Either the City or the union may petition the

State Board of Mediation and Arbitration to

appoint a mediator. This request must be made

within 10 working days of the transmittal of the

written decision in Step 4. Should mediation fail

to resolve the question, then it may be processed

to Step 6.

(53) If all previous steps fail in reaching a satisfactory settlement, the grievance may be referred by
the Association or the City to the Michigan State

Labor Mediation Board in accordance with provisions set forth in Act 379 of the Public Acts of

Michigan of 1965, as amended, or either party

may take such other action as they may desire. If

the Association or the City requests a mediation

meeting, the other party will be so notified in

advance of the meeting.

(88) If, as a result of such efforts outlined in Steps

1-3, a satisfactory settlement cannot be reached,

both parties shall jointly submit the issue to

mediation by the WERC. The parties may, however, by mutual agreement, waive this step (mediation) and submit the issue to arbitration . . .

(89) (a) If the grievance is not settled, it may be

submitted first at the union’s option, to mediation

by a State mediator from the Connecticut State

Board of Mediation and Arbitration. If the union

elects to seek mediation its request therefore shall

be in writing and must be filed with the Board not

later than 10 working days after receipt of the

written answer of the Director of Personnel and

Labor Relations set forth in 17.4 above. The union

will advise the Director of Personnel and Labor

Relations in writing of their submission of the

grievance to mediation at the time of filing.

(b) If the grievance is not resolved through

mediation within five (5) days after the conference

as provided in subsection (a) above the grievance

may then be submitted to arbitration ....

Only a few provisions include any details. At times,

the method of selecting the mediator is set forth as was

the disposition of costs. The mediator might be limited

to the issues before him, and the clause could emphasize

his advisory role by stipulating that any recommendation or advice he may offer would not be binding. The

mediator’s effectiveness will depend upon his acceptance

by the parties and his skills at bridging the gap between

them:

(68) If the grievance is not resolved by the Chief of

Police to the satisfaction of the member and/or

the Association, the assistance of a mediator shall

be obtained. Such mediator shall be selected from

a list of 5 names submitted by the State Conciliation Service; the Chief shall first strike a name,

followed by the member and/or Association until

one name remains. The remaining individual shall

serve as the impartial mediator. The mediator shall

consider only the issue(s) presented, and his

determination in the matter shall be submitted in

writing to both parties. After the mediator has

submitted his report, the member and/or the

Association shall then again attempt to resolve the

grievance; the Chief shall again use the grievance

form to notify the member of his decision. The

cost of mediation shall be borne equally by the

department and the Association.

(90) In the event the Board of Pierce County

Commissioners cannot agree with the union as to a

disposition of the grievance, the dispute may be

referred to a neutral mediator pursuant to RCW

49.08.010, which provides that it shall be the duty

of the Director of Labor and Industries, upon

application of the union or employer having

differences, as soon as is practicable, to visit the

location of such differences and to advise the

respective parties what, if anything, ought to be

done or submitted to by both to adjust said

dispute. The advice of the mediator shall be

advisory only and not binding on the Board of

Pierce County Commissioners or the union unless

agreed to prior to a specific mediation request.

(91) If the aggrieved person is not satisfied with the

disposition of his grievance he may .... request in

writing to the Association that his grievance be

mediated.

. . . The Association shall (A) recommend to

the aggrieved that no further action be taken, or

(B) .. . that any further action is on his own

responsibility or (C) submit the grievance in

writing to the mediator.

In the event the Association requests mediation,

a mediator shall be selected as follows: A mediator

will be named by mutual agreement . . . should the

parties be unable to agree on a mediator . . . the Association’s representative will name one advisor and

the Board’s representative shall name one advisor.

These 2 advisors shall select a mediator . . .

The mediator shall have 10 days . . . to help the

parties reach agreement. If... he is unable to

resolve the dispute, he shall give a verbal and

written report to the Board stating the steps that

he has taken in attempting to reach an agreement

and his recom m endation for resolution.

Information copies of his recommendation shall be

sent to the Association and the aggrieved person.

The mediator shall then be dismissed.

Mediators are, in almost all cases, obtained from a

State or local agency:

Source of mediator Agreements Workers

Referring to mediation.................. 31 15,800

Referring to source of mediator .................. 21 8,108

State or local agency........................... 18 7,881

Federal Mediation and Concilation

Service............................................ 1 52

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban

Development................................. 2 175

Reference to mediation; no reference to

source of mediator................................. 10 7,692

The tendency to seek help from a State or local

agency may reflect either legal requirements or the

parties’ desire to obtain local mediators knowledgeable

about local government and its labor relations situation.

Similarly, the two agreements requesting mediation from

the United States Department of Housing and Urban

Development designate the labor relations director of

the regional office, again a mediator likely to know the

local situation. In the case of State and local agencies,
mediators may be full-time employees of the agency, or

private individuals who the agency has determined have

the skills and experience to mediate. This determination

is made by the State or local agency only after each

individual’s background and experience is examined.

Arbitration. Arbitration procedures are found in 79

percent of the agreements having grievance provisions.

(See table 10.) Although it is the most prevalent of the

arrangements providing for third party Assistance to

resolve grievance disputes, arbitration is still less frequently found in public sector contracts than in those

for private industry. In part this may be the result of the

slow acceptance of arbitration in public employment.

For years prior to the advent of collective bargaining as a

major factor in public employee labor relations, grievance resolution lay completely in management’s hands.

The growth of collective bargaining, however, has

brought change, and public employers moved, through

negotiations, from unilateral grievance resolution, to

advisory arbitration, and then to final and binding

arbitration.

Scope o f arbitration. About two-fifths of the arbitration

provisions specifically define the scope of the procedure,

most often making it the same as the grievance procedure:

(93) Any unresolved grievance which relates to the

interpretation, application or enforcement of any

specific article and section of this agreement or

any written supplementary agreement and which

has been fully processed through Step 7 of the

grievance procedure may be submitted to arbitration ....

The arbitral forum here established is intended

to resolve disputes between the parties only over

the interpretation or application of the matters

which are specifically covered in this agreement

and which are not excluded from arbitration.

Some clauses, as a precaution, repeat that nongrievable matters are also non-arbitrable:

(94) Grievance and arbitration. A grievance is a

dispute limited to a claim of violation of the

express terms of this agreement.

A complaint is a dispute which concerns

matters not covered by the express terms of this

agreement and is not subject to the arbitration

provision as hereinafter provided. . . .

(95) Any dispute arising between the parties may be

subject to the grievance procedure, however only

disputes arising out of the interpretation and

application of the collective bargaining agreement

are subject to arbitration. . . . Those subjects over

which the Police and Fire Commission has authority are expressly precluded from the arbitration

process and shall be subject to the rules and

regulations of the Police and Fire Commission.

Scope Agreements Workers

Total having arbitration . ,.............465 730,391

Referring to the scope of

arbitration................................. .............184 196,479

Same as grievance................. .............134 137,455

Some grievance issues

omitted .......................... ..............50 59,024

Reference to arbitration;

no reference to scope............... .............281 533,912

It is safe to assume that the number of provisions in

which the jurisdiction of grievance and arbitration

arrangements is the same is much higher than shown.

Agreements referring to arbitration but not to scope

often state that grievances will move automatically to

arbitration if not settled at the final step before

arbitration. The implication of these clauses is that the

scope of grievance and arbitration is identical:

(92) If the grievance is not settled, either party may,

within 15 days after the reply of the Director is

due, by written notice to the other, request

arbitration.

The scope of arbitration is more likely to be the same

where the grievance definition is broadly defined to

apply to matters concerning the interpretation and

application of the agreement:

Other provisions outlined specific issues that would

not go to arbitration, among them matters subject to

special appeals procedures such as discipline. Adverse

actions, or such issues as job classifications, evaluations,

and decisions on probationary personnel also are excluded:

(96) The Grievance Appeal Board shall consist of an

authorized representative of the Department of

Public Safety appointed by the Commissioner of

Public Safety, an authorized representative of the

Lodge, and an impartial arbitrator selected by the

Lodge and employer representative. In the event

they are unable to agree upon an impartial

arbitrator within five days after the request for

arbitration is made by either party, the impartial

arbitrator shall be selected through and pursuant

to the rules of the American Arbitration Association. The cost of the impartial arbitrator shall be

borne equally by both parties. The decision of the

Board shall be made within thirty days of the

closing of the hearing and shall be binding upon

both parties. This Grievance Appeal Board will

have no jurisdiction over disciplinary cases.

(97) Grievances may be submitted relating to

matters contained in this agreement or which have

not been the subject of collective bargaining,

except those matters discussed but not agreed and

suspensions, dismissals and reduction in grade are

not arbitrable.
(98) Arbitration. Either the union or management

may appeal any decision by the Civil Service Board

of a grievance on matters other than discipline or

classification.

(99) Powers of the arbitrator. It shall be the

function of the arbitrator, and he shall be empowered, except as his powers are limited below,

after due investigation, to make a decision in cases

of alleged violation of the specific articles and

sections of this Agreement.

(a) He shall have no power to add to, subtract

from, disregard, alter or modify any of the

terms of this Agreement.

(b) He shall have no power to establish salary

scales or change any salary, unless, it is

found that a teacher has been improperly

placed on the existing salary schedule.

(c) He shall have no power to rule on any of the

following:

1. The termination of services of or

failure to reemploy any probationary

teacher.

2. The placing of a non-tenure teacher on

a third year of probation.

3. The termination of services or failure

to reemploy any teacher to a position

on the co-curricular schedule.

4. Any matter involving teacher evaluation.

In one agreement, management’s rights were not

arbitrable, nor were disciplinary actions and discharges

of employees violating the no-strike clause. The employer, however, reserved the right to arbitrate, or file

other claims against the union for similar violations:

(100) Excluded from arbitration are grievances which

question the exercise of rights set forth in Section

6 of this agreement entitled MANAGEMENT

RESPONSIBILITY, or which question the use or

application of any right over which the employer

is given unilateral discretion in this agreement.

However the union shall not be precluded from

arbritrating a grievance based upon the claim that

the employer has exceeded such rights as set forth

in the said Section 6 of this agreement.

Excluded from arbitration are disputes and

unresolved grievances concerning the discipline or

discharge of strikers who struck in violation of the

no strike pledge in this agreement.

Excluded from arbitration at the election of

the employer but in no manner waived in any

other forum, are any monetary claims by the

employer against the union, its officers or members for breach of the no strike pledge in this

agreement.

Referral to arbitration. Because the costs of arbitration

are high, the decision to invoke arbitration is not lightly

made. Expenditures of money and time, the likeihood of

success, the possible effect upon the union-management

relationship, and internal union politics, all may be

considered.

Over two-fifths of the agreements having arbitration

clauses stipulated that either party could initiate arbitration proceedings. (See table 11.) The party invoking

arbitration has to notify the other that this step has been

taken:

(101) Arbitration shall be invoked by written notice

to the other party of intention to arbitrate. . . .

(102) If the union or the Town is not satisfied with

the decision of the Personnel Board, it may within

15 working days after receipt of the decision

submit grievance to arbitration. Notice of intention to proceed to arbitration must be given to the

Town Manager or union president within 10

working days after receipt of such decision.. . .

Almost another two-fifths of the arbitration provisions permit only the employee organization to call for

arbitration. More importantly, the grievant can not act

independently of the union and invoke a costly arbitration that the union does not feel should be carried

forward. On the other hand, the union can arbitrate

without the grievant’s consent:

(103) If the union believes that the matter should be

carried further, it will, within 30 days of the Civ.

Serv. Bds. answer, refer the matter to the American Arbitration Association for the selection of an

impartial Arbitrator, to be selected by the union

and the employer, to determine the dispute.

(104) Within 10 days from the receipt of the written

decision of the department head, or his designated

representative, Local 434, on behalf of an employee it has represented in the processing of this

grievance, may request that the grievance be

submitted to arbitration ....

(105) If not satisfied with the Department Head’s

answer, the union with or without the employee,

may within 10 days after receipt thereof, request

that the matter be submitted to an impartial

arbitrator ....

(50) Should the aggrieved employee and the union

consider the reply of the Director of the Department of Institutions to be unsatisfactory, the

union shall, within 5 working days of the receipt

of the reply, notify in writing the Administrator

and the Director of the Department of Institutions

of its intention to refer the grievance to arbitration ....

About 10 percent of the agreements having arbitration specify that the grievant could initiate the process,

or that the grievant together with the employee organization could do so:

(106) If agreement is reached as a result of this

meeting the director of employee relations shall
issue a disposition of the matter which shall be

final and binding. If agreement is not reached, the

aggrieved shall, within 3 days after the Step 3

meeting, notify, in writing, the director of employee relations that arbitration is required.

(107) If the employee or union is dissatisfied with

such decision, he or the union may request

arbitration of the dispute as follows, provided that

no provision of this agreement which is stated to

be a matter of policy shall be subject to arbitration:

(a) If the employee or union is dissatisfied with

the decision in Step 4 or the grievance cannot be

resolved, he or the union may submit the case to

the District of Columbia Board of Labor Relations

for arbitration. The request to the Board must be

presented in writing and the decision of the Board

will be final and binding on both parties.

By electing to go to arbitration, the grievant at times

specifically waives his right to use other governmental

appeals forums:

(108) Arbitration shall be initiated by certified letter

from the grievant, and bearing the written approval to proceed of the president of the Federation, addressed to the Superintendant of Schools.

Such letter shall be mailed within 20 school days

of receipt of the written decision of the Board.

Such request can be honored only if the grievant

or grievants and the Federation waive the right if

any, in writing of said grievant or grievants and the

Federation to submit the underlying dispute to

any other administrative or judical tribunal except

for the purpose of enforcing the arbitrators award.

Where mutual consent is required before arbitration

can be started, each party may veto such a move, thus

weakening the availability of arbitration. If arbitration is

barred, the aggrieved party conceivably may seek other

remedies, such as legal action. Mutual consent might also

be required to conform to State Law:

(109) Upon mutual agreement of the parties . . that a

grievance not resolved in Step 3 shall be taken

before an arbitrator for final settlement, the

Association President and the legal representative

of the City will select an arbitrator. . . .

Whenever the parties do not agree that an

arbitrator will be used for final settlement, either

party may seek an appropriate legal remedy.

(110) The parties have to recognize that under

existing Utah law a present agreement to arbitrate

future disputes is wholly unenforceable. Accordingly, it is understood and agreed that neither

party shall have the right to initiate or require the

other party to participate in or bear the expenses

of any arbitration proceedings unless an agreement

in writing for the submission of a particular

dispute to arbitration shall be concluded. Within

10 school days after receipt of the written request

for submission to arbitration, the superintendent

or the Association shall respond in writing indicating whether it consents to submit the grievance

to arbitration.

Type o f arbitration machinery. In writing an arbitration

clause, the parties have to agree on what type of

arbitration machinery will best serve their needs—a single

arbitrator, an arbitration board, a choice or combination

of these procedures, or by referral of the grievance to a

State agency for arbitration.

Single arbitrators, whether selected on an ad hoc

basis or for the term of the agreement, are provided for

by the parties in two-thirds of the agreements having

arbitration, covering three-quarters of the workers. (See

table 12.)

Boards of arbitration are found in less than onequarter of the agreements. These are generally tripartite.

More than 88 percent of the agreements having

arbitration procedures provide for the use of ad hoc

arbitrators. (See table 12.) Under this system, arbitrators, single or board, are chosen for each dispute. After

rendering a decision, the relationship is terminated, and

the arbitrator might or might not be chosen for

subsequent cases. There are several advantages in using

ad hoc arbitrators for both union and management. In

making selections, for example, both could seek arbitrators who are particularly qualified to handle the matter

at issue. If the parties are not satisfied with the way the

arbitrator handled the one case, they do not have to rehire him for others.

Only a small proportion of agreements establish a

permanent arbitrator or arbitration board for the duration of the contract. Most provide for a single impartial

umpire rather than a board. The advantages of a

permanent arbitrator or board lie in the expertise that

comes with growing knowledge of the collective bargaining relationship and its history, and conditions existing

at the worksite.

Selection o f ad hoc arbitrator. Nine out of ten ad hoc

arbitration agreements provide for selection of the

arbitrator directly by the parties. (See table 13.) Under

such arrangements, union and management may jointly

select an arbitrator or elect one by majority vote:

(111) The arbitration proceeding shall be conducted

by an arbitrator to be selected by the Employer

and the Union within 7 days after notice has been

given.

(112) In case agreement cannot be reached, a grievance board shall be named consisting of 3 representatives of the employer and 3 representatives of

the employees. In case of deadlock in the grievance board, they shall, by majority vote, select an

impartial arbitrator to dispose of all deadlock

cases ....
In other agreements, the parties choose from a list of

arbitrators furnished by an outside agency. The largest

single group of employees is represented by these

agreements because of the influence on coverage of four

large New York State contracts, each of which require

the two parties to choose an impartial arbitrator from a

list provided by the State Department of Civil Service.

Such a list could also be drawn up by mutual agreement

of the parties:

(113) Upon receipt of a notice requesting arbitration,

the parties shall meet to select an arbitrator from a

panel established by the Department of Civil

Service upon mutual agreement by the State and

CSEA. The method of selection and the selection

of the panel and the method of designation of the

individual arbitrator for a particular case shall be

agreed upon hv the State and CSEA prior to

March 31, 1973, provided, however, that it is

contemplated that the essential method of selection of the -u !)itrator for a particular case shall be

by agreement, and failing such agreement, then by

lot from the panel.

(114) The State and SPA shall meet as soon as

feasible after the execuation of this agreement to

seek agreement on an arbitration panel composed

of 7 members.

Within 1 week of the receipt of a notice of

intent to arbitrate, representatives of the State and

SPA shall meet for the purpose of selecting the

arbitrator from the panel either by agreement or

by striking one name from the list of the arbitration panel until one name remains . . . The parties

may by agreement substitute another person for a

member of the panel.

Most remaining agreements provide for appointment

of the arbitrator by a private or government agency:

(115) If the union decides to arbitrate the grievance,

the arbitration proceedings shall be conducted by

an arbitrator selected by the American Arbitration

Association.

(116) If the grievance is not settled by Steps A, B and

C and the aggrieved does not elect to pursue his

grievance under the provisions of the Civil Service

Act, then the union shall have the right to submit

such grievance to an arbitrator appointed by

PERC.

While a few of the arbitration provisions are silent on

selection procedures where the parties could not agree

on an arbitrator, most provide for some form of impasse

resolution. Nearly one-half of the agreements with

provisions for ad hoc arbitrators specify that an outside

agency will supply a list from which an impartial

arbitrator would be chosen if union and management

can not agree. Some even specify the method that the

two would use to make their selection from the list, such

as alternate striking of names:

(117) If within 5 days after notice has been received

that either party desires arbitration of the dispute,

no arbitrator can be mutually agreed upon, then

the selection of the arbitrator shall be made from a

list of arbitrators provided by the New York State

Public Employment Relations Board in accordance

with their procedures . . .

(118) In the event the matter is submitted to arbitration, an arbitrator shall be appointed by mutual

consent of the parties hereto within 10 days after

arbitration is invoked. If the parties cannot agree,

they shall, by joint letter, solicit names of 5

arbitrators from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service from which each party shall

alternately strike names until one arbitrator remains.

Less frequently, the parties agreed to have an outside

agency appoint the arbitrator if they are unable to make

a selection on their own:

(119) The arbitration proceeding shall be conducted

by an arbitrator to be selected by the employer

and the union within 7 days after notice has been

given. If the parties fail to select an arbitrator,

either party may request the assignment of an

arbitrator by the American Arbitration Association.

In still other instances where the parties can not agree

on an arbitrator, the selection may be made by a judge

or by a combination of two or more of the preceding ad

hoc selection procedures:

(120) The City Manager and the FOP shall each

promptly appoint a disinterested representative to

the committee. The third committee member shall

be selected by mutual consent of the first two

appointees and shall be a disinterested, impartial,

non-City employee. If after 2 days the third

member cannot be agreed upon, he shall be

selected by the presiding judge of the Superior

Court of Pima County, Arizona.

(104) The parties shall select a mutually acceptable

arbitrator from the list of arbitrators maintained

by the Los Angeles County Employee Relations

Commission and request said Commission to appoint such arbitrator pursuant to their established

procedures. If the parties cannot agree on an

arbitrator, they shall notify the Employee Relations Commission and request that the Commission provide the parties with a list of five names

from which the parties will attempt to mutually

select an arbitrator. If after 5 days the parties

cannot agree on an arbitrator, the parties will

request the Employee Relations Commission to

appoint the arbitrator.

Selection o f permanent arbitrators. Of the 19 agreements

providing for a permanent arbitrator or board, 11

stipulate that only union and management would select
the arbitrator. Of these, five name the arbitrator in the

agreement:

(121) The parties agree on the appointment of Joseph

Wildebush of Paterson, New Jersey, an impartial

arbitrator who shall have full power to hear and

determine the dispute between the parties. In the

event of the arbitrator’s incapacity, the parties

shall agree on a replacement . . .

(122) The Impartial Arbitrator to serve as such until

March 31, 1974 shall be Theodore W. Kheel, Esq.,

who has been selected by the parties to this

agreement:

In six other agreements, the agency and the union are

to appoint a permanent arbitrator or arbitrators after

execution of the agreement:

(123) For the purpose of administering this section of

this agreement, the parties to this agreement shall

employ a competent permanent arbitrator, mutually acceptable to both parties. . . . all decisions of

said arbitrator on disputes concerning this agreement which are submitted to him shall be final and

binding on both parties to this agreement.

Two other agreements provide for the selection to be

made by the employer and union from a permanent

panel. In one large New York City agreement, the

selection was made from a permanent list prepared by

the city’s Office of Collective Bargaining:

(124) .. . Such arbitration shall be conducted by an

arbitrator designated from a standing panel of 3

arbitrators maintained by the Office of Collective

Bargaining in accordance with applicable law, rules

and regulations . . .

Two agreements provide for selection according to

the rules of the American Arbitration Association when

the parties are unable to agree on the selection of the

permanent arbitrator:

(125) In the event the parties are unable to agree

upon the appointment, or in the event the agreed

upon umpire becomes incapacitated and is unable

to continue to serve as such and the parties are

unable to agree upon a mutually acceptable

alternate, the umpire shall be selected in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration

Association.

One agreement allows the union and the Personnel

Committee o f the County Board of Supervisors to select

the permanent arbitrator; and another authorizes the

American Arbitration Association to appoint one from a

panel of three arbitrators:

(126) To assist in the resolution of disputes arising

under the terms of this Memorandum of Agreement and in order to provide an impartial forum

to resolve such disputes, the parties agree to

appoint an impartial umpire who shall act in each

area of dispute as hereinafter provided. Such

umpire shall be seleted by mutual agreement

between the union and Personnel Committee of

the County Board of Supervisors and shall be

compensated for his services in a manner which is

mutually satisfactory to the County, the Union

and the umpire. He shall serve for a period of 1

year from the date of his appointment except that

his term of office may be extended from time to

time by mutual agreement of all parties.

(127) The American Arbitration Association shall

appoint one of a panel of three arbitrators to be

designated by mutual agreement of the parties, to

serve in rotation for any case or cases submitted.

Only a small number of arbitration boards are

included among the provisions for permanent arbitration

and these vary in method of selection. Some set this

forth in meticulous detail:

(128) Board of Arbitration. The Civil Service Arbitration Board shall be constituted as follows:

a. One member shall be appointed by the

Mayor from among the members of the City

Commission.

b. One member shall be appointed by the City

Commission. Such member shall be a resident taxpayer of the City who neither holds

nor is a candidate for any other public office

or position and who is not an officer or

employee of any political or party organization.

c. Two members shall be appointed by the City

Commission from among persons nominated

as follows:

(1) Each U nion representing City

employees shall nominate 4 different

persons, each of whom shall be resident taxpayers of the City who neither

hold or are candidates for any other

public office or position and who are

not officers or employees of any

political or party organization. Onehalf of such nominees shall not be City

employees or members of any labor

union, or spouses of such members,

and 1 of that half of the nominees shall

be appointed by the City Commission

to the Civil Service Board. The Commission will appoint a second member

of the Civil Service Board from the

remaining one-half of the nominees.

d. The four (4) members so appointed shall

nominate 3 impartial persons, each of whom

are resident taxpayers of the City who

neither hold nor are candidates for any other

public office or position and who are not

City employees or members of any labor

union or spouses of such members. If they

cannot agree on 3 such nominees, the

Governor of the State of Michigan shall
nominate 3 impartial persons who are resident taxpayers of the City, who neither hold

nor are candidates for any other public office

or position and who are not officers or employees of any political or party organization. One of such nominees shall be appointed by the City Commission as the fifth

member of the Board.

e. A vacancy on the Civil Service Board shall be

filled by a person nominated and appointed

in the same manner as used in the case of his

predecessor, except that in the case of a

successor for the member nominated by the

Unions who was not a City employee or a

member or spouse of a member of a Labor

Union, the nominees shall also meet that

requirement, and further provided that for

each future position to be filled from among

Union nominated persons, each Union representing City employees shall each nominate

4 different persons. The term of such appointee shall be as provided by the City

Charter.

(129) The arbitration shall be conducted by a tripartite arbitration panel. One member of the panel

shall be appointed by the Board and this individual’s minimal professional qualifications shall be

those of the holder of a principal’s certificate. One

member of the panel shall be appointed by the

union and this individual’s minimal professional

qualification shall be those of the holder of a

teacher’s certificate. The third member of the

panel shall be selected by mutual agreement of the

first two above named panel members except that

any individual so selected shall be a bona fide

resident of New Jersey and a member of the

National Academy of Arbitration with a minimum

of five years experience as arbitrator.

The first two named panel members shall be

appointed within one week of the ratification of

this agreement. The third panel member shall be

selected by the first two within 10 days after their

selection. In the event that the first two are unable

to agree upon the selection of the neutral panel

member as described above - either of the two

shall call upon the American Arbitration Association to name the third panel member. Any

individual so selected shall be required to be a

bona fide resident of New Jersey. This panel shall

sit for the duration of the agreement. The mutual

third panel member shall serve as the Chairman of

the Panel and shall arrange the dates, meeting

places and agenda of any and all arbitration

proceedings.

Any decisions of this arbitration panel shall be

by majority vote. That is, by at least two members

of the panel.

The third neutral panel member shall serve

until he receives notice of termination of his

services by either the Board or the Union. In such

case a new third neutral panel member shall be

appointed as described above. Termination shall

not affect any grievance upon which a hearing has

commenced.

Another, negotiated by a State university, provides

for a permanent list of arbitrators from which a board is

to be chosen:

(130) The University and the union shall agree to a

list of at least nine members to serve as an

arbitration panel. The list shall consist of three

members recommended by the union, three members of the faculty recommended by the University, and three public members limited to Monongalia County recommended after mutual agreement by both the union and the University.

In the event arbitration is demanded on any

grievance, the union and the President of the

University shall each strike one name from each of

the three lists, permitting an arbitration panel of

three persons to result.

Outside agency used in the selection process. Nearly 85

percent of the provisions specifying the method of

selection employed an outside agency in some phase of

the procedure. The agency cited most frequently in the

selection process is the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Agreements mentioning AAA, however,

represent less than two-fifths of the employees using an

outside agency. Various State and local labor agencies

are specified in a slightly smaller number of agreements,

but these represent more employees. Together, these

two are cited in more than 87 percent of the agreements

which specify outside agencies, and cover more than 90

percent of the employees. Unlike agreements in private

industry, few used the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.

Nearly all of the agreement provisions were quite

specific in their choice of the outside agency they

wanted to use in selecting an arbitrator. However, a few

agreements offer the parties a choice or named a

particular agency as an example only:

(131) If agreement cannot be reached, then within 5

week days the parties jointly will request the State

Board of Mediation or the Federal Mediation and

Conciliation Service to submit a list of five

impartial persons qualified to act as arbitrators.

(132) In the event the parties are unable to agree

upon an arbitrator, the State Personnel Board shall

request from an agency such as the Federal

Mediation and Conciliation Service or similar organization to submit the names of 5 disinterested

persons qualified and willing to act as impartial

arbitrators.

Arbitration costs. Nearly 87 percent of the agreements

which include arbitration stipulated that costs will be

shared between employer and union. In practice, it is
probable that the parties under some of the contracts

not referring to cost might actually share expenses as

well. Where cost-sharing is referred to, virtually all

provisions provide for equal sharing:

Agreements Workers

Agreements having arbitration provisions . .465 730,391

Having reference to sharing costs ................404 577,222

Shared equally ....................................384 566,865

Shared unequally ............................... 20 10,357

No reference to sharing costs .........................61 153,169

In a few instances, costs would be shared by

employer and employees, where the bargaining agent

was clearly not involved in the dispute. The possibility

that an individual employee might be burdened with

paying a portion of usually high arbitration fees, would

act as deterrent to individuals who might otherwise

arbitrate their disputes against the advice of their

employee organization. Even where the union assumes

its share of the cost, the employee might be required to

meet at least a nominal charge:

(133) The fees and expenses of the arbitrator shall be

born equally by the Fire Department and employee concerned; provided, if the union is a party

to the dispute, such fees and expenses shall be

borne equally by the Fire Department and the

union.

(134) All costs of arbitration shall be shared equally

by the BOCES Board and the aggrieved (or the

association, if the grievance is supported by the

association).

(122) The impartial arbitrator shall be paid reasonable

compensation for his services. One-half of such

compensation shall be paid by the Authority. The

other one-half shall be paid by the union, less the

sum of $10 for each grievance appeal to the impartial arbitrator by an individual employee, which

sum shall be paid by the individual employee.

The costs to be shared are not always limited to the

fee charged for the actual arbitration proceeding, but

sometimes include other expenses as well:

(135) The arbitrator shall be paid his actual and

necessary traveling and other expenses incurred in

the performance of his duties plus a per diem

allowance of $100 for each day or part thereof

while engaged in the consideration of a dispute.

The parties shall equally share the cost and fees of

the arbitrator.

Although the expenses of the arbitrator might be

shared equally, the actual costs of arbitration could

differ for the parties, in any particular case, since each

generally paid the expenses incurred in its own presentation:

(136) Expenses for the proceedings shall be borne

equally by the employer and the union. However,

each party shall be responsible for compensating

its own representatives and witnesses.

In provisions involving a tripartite panel, the two

parties normally bear the expense of their own arbitrator

as well as other costs of presenting their position, but

they would share the cost of the neutral arbitrator. The

party requesting a written record of the proceeding is

responsible for such costs, under some provisions, while

in others it is to be shared equally:

(75) Expenses for the arbitrator’s services in the

proceedings shall be borne equally by the City and

the union or employee, provided, however, that

each party shall be responsible for compensating

his own representatives and witnesses. If either

party desires a transcript of the proceedings it may

cause such a record to be made, but shall bear the

cost, unless the transcript is taken by mutual

agreement. Each party shall be responsible for

providing his or its own copy. In the event the

arbitrator requires a verbatim record of the proceedings, the original transcript shall be borne

equally by both parties.

(137) The City and the union shall bear the expense

of their respective arbitrators and witnesses and

shall share equally the other expenses, including

those of the neutral arbitrator and stenographic

expenses.

Of the 20 agreements in which cost is not shared

equally, 11 are found at the municipal level. There are

some in which the employer assumes the heavier cost

burden. For example, one local jurisdiction was given an

option between using a State labor agency or an

independent arbitration organization for certain grievances. If it chose the independent service, the town

would assume the full costs of the arbitrator. In another

agreement, expenses were shared equally up to $1,000

per grievance, with any additional costs paid by the city;

and in a county agreement, the employer was required

to pay two-thirds of any costs and the union one-third:

(138) . . . Arbitration shall be by the State Board of

Mediation and Arbitration, except in the case of

grievances involving discharges, reprimands, reductions in rank or compensation, and suspensions

without pay, which may at the option of the

Town be submitted to the American Arbitration

Association. If the Town elects to exercise its

option, it shall pay the fees of the arbitrator.

(139) The costs of the arbitrators shall be borne

equally by the parties up to $1,000 per grievance.

Additional arbitration costs above $1,000 shall be

paid by the City. Each party shall be responsible

for costs of presenting its own case to arbitration.

(140) The costs of arbitration shall be borne as

follows: one-third by the employee organization

and two-thirds by the County.
In others where the costs of arbitration are not

shared equally, the full costs of the procedure are paid

by the losing party:

(103) . . . The fees and expenses of said arbitrator

shall be paid by the party against whom the

decision is rendered.

(141) Each party shall bear the cost of its chosen

arbitrator and the party whom the arbitrators’

decision is rendered against shall bear the entire

cost of the third arbitrator.

Status o f arbitrator's decision. An arbitrator’s decision

may be final and binding or advisory. Where it is final

and binding, no other action is necessary and the

grievance is considered to be resolved. On the other

hand, under advisory arbitration, there is no obligation

to accept the arbitrator’s ruling and if rejected further

action is required to settle the dispute. The additional

procedure usually involves a final decision by management at the highest agency levels.

However, the use of final and binding arbitration has

grown in State and local agreements. Contracts negotiated with the Federal Government are moving in the

same direction as well. Grievance arbitration, permitted

in Federal agreements, was advisory under Executive

Order 10988, but Executive Order 11491 allows the

parties to provide for final and binding arbitration, if

they so choose. However, contrary to normally accepted

concepts of final and binding arbitration, the decision

can be appealed to the Federal Labor Relations Council.

Of the State and local agreements with arbitration,

nearly 82 percent provide for a final and binding

decision. (See table 14.) In many, restrictions are placed

upon the arbitrator’s authority, commonly that the

decision would not alter or detract from the agreement.

Other agreements stipulate that the decision will be

binding unless it conflicts with applicable legislation and

that the arbitrator may not widen the scope of the issue

submitted by the parties:

(73) The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and

binding upon the parties, except that the arbitrator shall make no decision which alters, amends,

adds to or detracts from this agreement, or which

recommends a right or relief for any period of

time prior to the effective date of this agreement,

or which modifies or abridges the rights and

prerogatives of municipal management under Article V of this agreement.

(64) The decision or award of the arbitrator shall be

final and binding to the extent permitted by and

in accordance with applicable law and this agreement. The arbitrator shall confine himself to the

precise issue submitted for arbitration and shall

have no authority to determine any other issues

not so submitted to him.

In a few contracts, the status of the arbitrator’s

decision is not clear, since reference is made to city,

State, or other regulations which are not spelled out in

detail. The unusually large number of employees covered

by these vaguely defined clauses, is due primarily to one

New York City agreement covering 120,000 workers

which refers to arbitration, but includes no detail except

to cite procedures of the city’s Board of Collective

Bargaining and a city executive order.

Less than 10 percent of the arbitration procedures

provide for an advisory decision. The arbitrator’s award

may be accepted or rejected, or may be taken under

advisement in arriving at the final resolution:

(142) . • • The written decision of an arbitrator resulting from any arbitration or grievances hereunder

shall be entirely advisory in nature and shall in no

way be binding or legally effective upon any of the

parties hereto.

(143) The arbitration panel shall render its decision

based upon a majority vote, no later than 30

calendar days after the conclusion of the final

hearing. Such decision shall be reported to the

Commissioner of Labor and to the union, shall be

a matter of public record, and shall be advisory to

the Commissioner of Labor in order to enable him

or his designees to render a final decision.

(144) The arbitrator will report recommendations for

settlement of the grievance to the President and

the President of the Board within 15 working days

of the date of his selection. The Board will accept

or reject the arbitrator’s recommendation by

official action within 15 working days.

In 13 contracts, the award may be either final or advisory. Two Los Angeles County agreements, for example, allow binding arbitration only if mutually agreed

to by both parties. Others limit final and binding arbitration to situations not involving adverse actions:

(145) The arbitrator’s decision shall be entirely advisory in nature, except that by mutual agreement

the parties may stipulate that the arbitrator’s

decision shall be final and binding upon the parties

involved.

(24) The arbitrator’s award shall be final and binding except for adverse actions where arbitration is

advisory pursuant to Chapter 25, District Personnel Manual.

Limits on authority to award backpay. Only 15 percent

of the agreements contain provisions which limit the

arbitrator’s authority to award back pay:

Total agreements having

Agreements Workers

arbitration....................

Agreements having limits

........... 465 730,391

on back pay awards....................

No specific limits on

...........69 149,524

back pay awards........................... ...........396 580,867
A few agreements are careful to emphasize that an award

in one instance will not serve as a precedent which will

require a back pay award in another case:

(146) The decision of a majority of the Board of

Arbitrators in any case shall not require a retroactive wage adjustment in any other case. Either

party may, prior to the submission of a dispute to

arbitration, state, and the opposite party is bound

to agree, that the award shall not be a binding

precedent in like or analogous situations pending

at that time.

Management’s liability for back pay awards is limited

in still other cases. No liability usually exists for any

grievance filed prior to the execution of the agreement.

Limited retroactivity is permitted in some cases, however:

(147) In case of a grievance involving any continuing

or other money claim against the Facility, no

award shall be made by the arbitrator, which shall

allow any alleged accruals prior to the date when

such grievance shall have been presented to the

Facility in writing except in a case whereby the

employee or the union due to lack of knowledge

could not know prior to that date that there were

grounds for such a claim. In such cases, retroactive

claims shall be limited to a period of 30 calendar

days prior to the date the claim was first filed in

writing.

(148) No issue whatsoever shall be arbitrated or

subject to arbitration unless such issue results from

an action or occurence which takes place following

the execution of this agreement and no arbitration

determination or award shall be made by an

arbitrator which grants any case of “back-pay” or

other economic awards prior to the submission of

the grievance.

As a rule, the amount of the award would not

generally exceed the amount of wages that a suspended

grievant would have normally received had he remained

employed. Thus, compensation from a job taken while

not employed by the agency would be considered in

computing back pay:

(149) The arbitrator shall not have any authority to

add to, subtract from, or otherwise modify any of

the terms, clauses or provisions of this agreement.

Except as otherwise provided and limited by this

agreement, no grievance claiming back wages shall

exceed the amount of wages the employee otherwise would have earned less any remuneration or

payments he may have received, during his period

of suspension from employment with the University.

Final level o f decision other than arbitration. More than

15 percent of the agreements having grievance procedures call for the settlement of a dispute by someone

other than an arbitrator. In some cases an agreement

may call for a third party neutral (table 15), but most

often the power to settle remains in management’s

hands. Department or agency heads, or even the chief

executive for the government level involved frequently

are responsible for reaching a final decision. Under these

circumstances, the employee organization has little

power to affect the outcome except through persuasion.

In some contracts, this ultimate power of management is

ameliorated by giving the aggrieved recourse to the

courts, a costly avenue for the employee unless assisted

by the employee organization. In other agreements,

some final decision making power is placed elsewhere as

stipulated by law or civil service rule:

(150) If the grievance is not settled at the third step,

the Council may appeal in writing within 10

working days to the department head, who may

confer with the aggrieved and the Council and

notify the aggrieved and the Council in writing

within 10 working days from receipt of appeal.

(151) Third, and finally, if a satisfactory agreement is

not reached through completion of step two above

described, then the said grievance shall be forwarded to the Board of Works of the said City in

written form and within 8 days after receiving said

grievance, the Board of Works will arrange for a

final meeting between the said Board, the aggrieved employee, and any representatives said

employee may select to help present his case. This

does not preclude the aggrieved employee’s right

to initiate civil action.

(152) The aggrieved employee may then submit his

grievance to the Chairman of the Board of

Supervisors who, within 10 working days after he

receives the written grievance, will convene a

meeting between the aggrieved employee, his

Association Representative, and the Chairman of

the Board of Supervisors or other representatives

of the employer, for the purpose of resolving the

grievance. If the grievance is not resolved as a

result of this meeting, the grievance may be

submitted to the courts.

(153) If the employee who has presented a grievance . .. feels that the same has not been resolved,

a statement in writing shall be presented to the

City Manager which said statement shall set out

the nature of the grievance, the previous decisions

of each person to whom the same was submitted

and the reason it is felt that the same has not been

resolved . .. The decision of the Manager shall be

final except as otherwise provided by State law or

civil service rule.

A few provisions place the final decision in management’s hands but also provide for factfinding with

recommendations.2 As noted earlier, management’s

power to make the final decision is diminished to the

2 See PP» 15-16 for a discussion of factfinding.
extent that the parties and the public are aware of the

fact-finder’s recommendations and the reasons for them.

There is a tacit pressure upon management to adopt the

recommendations, and if it does not, to present a

carefully reasoned justification for this action, or face

the consequences of what might be interpreted as an

arbitrary act:

(55) The advisory panel shall review the grievance

and within 20 days from date of appointment of

third member, recommend a solution to the Mayor

and City Council. The Mayor and City Council

shall render the final decision.

(154) . . . File second appeal to superintendent by the

aggrieved.. . (The aggrieved in his appeal may

request the assistance of an advisory committe e .. . to report its findings of fact and conclusions to all interested parties) . . . Decision must

be made within 7 days after the hearing .. . The

superintendent’s decision is final and binding

except in those cases which by law may be

appealed elsewhere. . . .

(85) The employee grievance appeals committee

shall study the record of the case and shall hold an

informal hearing.

The committee shall notify the appointing

officer, the grievant and/or his representative, in

writing, of its recommendation within 7 working

days from the date of the conclusion of the formal

hearing.

Upon receipt of the committee’s recommendation, the appointing officer shall make a final

decision. . . If the appointing officer does not

accept the committee’s recommendation, he shall

fully set forth in writing his reasons for such

non acceptance, a copy of which shall be sent to

the Civil Service Commission.

A few agreements stipulate that mediation will be the

final step of the grievance procedure. Should the

mediator not succeed in his efforts, then, of course,

management’s view of the matter would prevail. In these

few agreements, the grievance is referred to mediation

under existing law or forwarded to a mediation agency:3

(51) Should the aggrieved employee and the union

consider the decision of Commissioner or his

appointed hearing officer to be unsatisfactory, the

union shall within 5 days of receipt of such

decision, notify the Commissioner in writing of Its

intention to have such grievance referred to

3 For a discussion of mediation as an intermediate step in the

procedure see pp. 16-18 above.

Mediation, (N. D, Statutes, Section 34-11-01

through 34-11-05.)

(155) In the event the properly accredited officers or

representatives of both parties herein cannot

amicably settle any dispute or grievance arising out

of the terms, application or interpretation of this

agreement, the matter may be, upon petition by

either party, referred to the United States Mediation Service.

(53) If all previous steps fail in reaching a satisfactory settlement, the grievance may be referred by

the Association or the City to the Michigan State

Labor Mediation Board in accordance with provisions set forth in Act 379 of the Public Acts of

Michigan of 1965, as amended, or either party

may take such other action as they may desire. If

the Association or the City requests a mediation

meeting, the other party will be so notified in

advance of the meeting.

Dissatisfied grievants may resort to legal action under

a few agreements. One provision restricted use of the

courts to instances where mediation was either refused

or it failed to result in resolution:

(156) . . . In the absence of agreement to mediate, or

failure of mediation, the issue shall be resolved by

an action in a court of competent jurisdiction on

motion by either party.

In other provisions, settlement only could be

achieved by submitting the grievance to a labor-management committee. These committees are generally

bipartite and are the only means of dispute resolution

referred to in the agreement:

(157) The purpose of the Grievance Committee shall

be to settle all grievances between the Fire

Department and the union as quickly as possible,

so as to insure efficiency and promote employee

morale. The Grievance Committee shall consist of

the Chief, Assistant Chief, and two firefighters

selected by the union.

(158) Metro and the Association agree to create a

committee to be known as the “Policy Committee,” which shall be composed of not more than

five representatives of Metro and five representatives of the Association. This committee shall meet

on call for the purpose of discussing the following:

(a) Any policy of Metro which will affect the

bargaining unit;

(b) Disputes which may arise from time to

time over the interpretation of the contract or

rules and regulations of Metro.
Chapter 4. Official Time, Time Limits, and

Withdrawal of Grievances

Official time. There are two schools of thought concerning payments to union representatives for time spent in

the preparation and processing of grievance and arbitration cases. One opposes payments on the grounds that

the union steward, grievant and witness are carrying out

functions that are primarily of interest to the union and

are of no benefit to management. According to this

school, paid union stewards are likely to spend a great

deal of time finding and promoting grievances rather

than settling them quickly. The school supporting

payments holds that contract administration is a proper

task for both parties and that there is a mutual benefit in

resolving grievances. The work force, according to this

approach, is more productive when grievances are not

left to fester for long periods.

Nearly one-half of the 591 agreements with grievance

procedures provided a paid time allowance to employees

for preparation or processing of grievances. (See table

16.) Specific reference to payments for time spent on

arbitration cases, however, are found in only 9 percent

of the agreements having arbitration. Conceivably, many

of the provisions granting official time for processing

grievances, may in practice, apply to arbitration as well.

In a number of cases where the agreement is silent,

informal arrangements may exist for time off to prepare

and process grievance and arbitration cases.

Beneficiaries of the payment rule are, for the most

part, union representatives, less often the grievant, and

least often the witness. (See table 16.) Again, informal

practice may exist which provides payments to those not

specified in provisions. In those clauses applying to

union officials, the definition of time off as “sufficient”

or “reasonable” introduced an element of discretion in

administering the provision. Nearly all of the clauses

required stewards to notify supervisors in advance of

when they expected to be away from their work sites:

(159) Union stewards and officers shall be granted

sufficient time off during working hours to investigate and to settle grievances without loss of pay.

Stewards will notify division heads before taking

such time off. In the absence of the Division Head,

they shall notify the immediate supervisor.

(160) Union stewards and the union president shall

be granted reasonable time off during working

hours to investigate and settle grievances, upon

notice to their department head or immediate

supervisor, without loss of pay.

To avoid management abuse of its discretionary

power, several agreements state that permission to work

on grievances will not be unreasonably withheld:

(161) Association representatives, as well as aggrieved

employees participating in the settlement of a

dispute, shall be paid at their normal pay rate by

the town except in the arbitration step of the

procedure. Association representatives and officers, before absenting themselves from work to

investigate complaints and grievances and working

conditions, or to discuss association business with

town authorities, shall be granted permission from

their immediate supervisor, which permission shall

not be unreasonably withheld, nor shall said

representative or officer of the association suffer

loss of pay.

Some provisions also permit paid time to the grievant

or to any witness who might be brought into the

proceedings. However, the time spent on grievancerelated activities can be excluded from calculations of

employee eligibility for subsequent overtime payment.

Moreover, if hearings extend beyond the normal workday, employees, as a rule, are not paid overtime:

(162) E m ployees subm itting complaints or

grievances, employees involved in complaint and

grievance investigations, and employees attending

complaint and grievance meetings and proceedings

may do so during working hours without loss of

pay and without charge to annual or sick leave.

Time spent in such activity shall not be considered

“time actually worked” for purposes of computing

eligibility for overtime compensation.

(163) At each step of the grievance procedure, the

employee shall be permitted to call, and the

employer will approve, a reasonable number of

employee witnesses necessary to the development

of facts who shall suffer no loss of pay or leave.

Overtime will not be paid any employee and

witness.
Payments for time spent on arbitration cases are far

more restrictive. In some instances, contracts stipulate

that time spent in arbitration-related activities is not

compensable time:

(106) Any loss of time by the employee and his

representatives to attend [arbitration hearings]

shall n o t be compensated.

(164) Employees, as grievants, witnesses or union

representatives shall not be paid for time spent in

arbitration proceedings.

In other contracts, however, the same payments apply to

arbitration and grievance cases alike:

(165) In addition thereto, employees shall be granted

reasonable time during working hours without

penalty, to discuss grievances or other problems

connected with their employment with union

representatives, so long as permission has been

previously granted to do so by the employer, or to

testify before an arbitrator.

Witnesses, as a rule, are paid, and a local union officer

might be paid, but not stewards or grievance committee

members. Nonpayment to union officials is not unexpected since in general both union and management

traditionally pay their own expenses and equally share

those of the neutral arbitrator:

(166) The panel shall meet as promptly as possible.

The fees and expenses of the third arbitrator shall

be paid by the party against whom the arbitrator

renders an adverse decision. In the event more

than one grievance is referred to the same hearing,

the costs of the arbitration shall be divided

proportionately, the loser bearing the proportionate share of the costs for the cases lost. All

other expense for witnesses or otherwise shall be

borne by the party incurring the cost. However,

any city employee called as a witness by either

side will continue to receive his regular rate of pay

while attending such hearing, not to exceed the

normal hours he would have been on duty.

(167) Stewards and grievance committee members

shall suffer no loss of time or pay for time

necessarily lost from their regularly scheduled

working hours while investigating and presenting

grievances as provided in the grievance procedure,

but only the local unit President or his designated

representative shall be paid for the time necessarily

spent in attending the arbitration hearing . . .

Time limits. There is a consensus that the rapid

settlement of disputes is essential to the development

and maintenance of a good labor-management relationship. When a grievance remains "‘pending5' and the time

stretches out without resolution, recollections of what

originally happened become hazy and may affect subsequent testimony at hearings. Resentment may build

up, tensions rise, and employee morale drop with

adverse results on production. Yet despite the desire to

avoid these results, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service reported that in Fiscal 1973, the time spent

from initiation of a complaint until an arbitrator was

requested was 85 days. By the time an award was issued

a total of 257 days had passed.1

One way to minimize undue delays is to place time

limits on management, union, and grievant.2 The principle adopted here is that at each step of the procedure

one of the participants has the responsibility to act, and

if he does not, he waives any further grievance rights

that he may have. Such time limits are found in most

grievance procedures. (See table 17.)

The first person required to act within a given time

span is the grievant. He must file a complaint within a

given number of days from the actual occurrence or

from the time when he learned of the event. The actual

time limit may vary for different kinds of grievable

matters:

(168) Grievances shall be promptly filed. To be

considered, a grievance must be filed at the first

step within 48 hours of its occurrence (exclusive

of Saturday, Sunday or a holiday) or when the

employee first became aware (or in the exercise of

reasonable diligence should have become aware) of

its occurrence, but in no case may a grievance be

filed more than 30 days after occurrence.

(72) An employee and/or MNA may request the

settlement of a grievance by observing the following procedure within the following designated time

limits after knowledge or reason to know of the

occurrence or failure of occurrence of the incident

upon which the grievance is based:

(a) 1 year for clerical errors;

(b) 30 days for other matters other than

dismissal;

(c) 1 week for discipline or dismissal.

Time limits may be set forth in great detail covering

various steps of the grievance. Occasionally, time limits

may be waived under designated circumstances:

^ sery , William J. Jr., “The Role of FMCS in Disputes

Settlement,” unpublished speech before the Labor-Management

Arbitration Conference, American Arbitration Association, Dec.

4,1973, Cleveland, Ohio.

2 Another approach is to adopt expedited arbitration procedures which are being experimented with in the steel industry

and at the Ford Motor Company. See Monthly Labor Review,

Nov., 1972, pp. 7 -1 0 .
(169) T im etable fo r H andling Grievances:

L evel

Deadline for

Su bm ittin g

Grievances

Deadline for

M eeting

D eadline for

R eaching

D ecision

Immediate

Supervisor 30 days 1 days 3 days

Superintendent

10 days after

prior decision 7 days 3 days

Board of

Education

10 days after

prior decision

15 days 10 days

Arbitration Notice to

other party

10 days after

prior decision As Promptly as Possible

In the event of an emergency, act of God, or other

situation beyond the control of the parties, any

aggrieved person, the Superintendent, or any

immediate supervisor involved in a particular

grievance, the aforesaid time limits shall be suspended during the pendency of the said condition

or conditions.

Often the days referred to are carefully defined as

working days to assure that no days are lost over a

weekend or other non-working days. Clauses may also

stipulate that a postmark will act as evidence of timely

filing even though the notice may be received after the

deadline has passed. There may be occasions when

deadlines cannot be met, and although it is contrary to

the purpose of time limits — namely to expedite the

movement of grievances through the procedures - there

may be mutual agreement to extend a deadline. Only

rarely can one party extend it unilaterally:

(170) Section 3. D efinitions and Interpretations:

Subd. 1. Extension: Time limits specified

in this Agreement may be extended by mutual agreement.

Subd. 2. Days: Reference to days regarding time periods in this procedure shall refer to working days.

A working day is defined as all

week days not designated as

holidays in this contract.

Subd. 3. Computation of Time: In computing any period of time

prescribed or allowed by procedures herein, the date of the act,

event, or default for which the

designated period of time begins

to run shall not be included. The

last day of the period so computed shall be counted, unless it

is a Saturday, a Sunday, or a

legal holiday, in which event the

period runs until the end of the

next day which is not a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday.

Subd. 4. Filing and Postmark: The filing

or service of any notice or document herein shall be timely if it

bears a certified postmark of the

United States Postal Service

within the time period.

Section 4. Time Limitation and Waiver: Grievances

shall not be valid for consideration unless the

grievance is submitted in writing to the school

board’s designee, setting forth the facts and the

specific provision of the Agreement allegedly

violated and the particular relief sought within

tw e n ty days after the date the event giving rise to

the grievance occurred, or the employee had

reasonable knowledge thereof. Failure to file any

grievance within such period shall be deemed a

waiver thereof. Failure to appeal a grievance from

one level to another within the time periods

hereafter provided shall constitute a waiver of the

grievance. An effort shall first be made to adjust

an alleged grievance informally between the employee and the school board’s designee.

(71) All time Emits in this procedure shall refer to

working days. A working day is defined as all week

days not designated as holidays by State Law. The

filing or service of any notice or document herein

shall be timely if it bears a postmark of the United

States mail within the time period. The number of

days indicated at each level should be considered a

maximum and every effort should be made to

expedite the process.

(45) However, any time specified for initiating or

processing the grievance under the grievance procedure may be extended by either party for a period

not in excess of 5 working days. Any further

extension must be by mutual agreement. Saturdays, Sundays and holidays shall not be included

within the limitation of time for processing

grievances where limitation is for “working days.”

Time limits on the initial presentation of a grievance

are very important. If the employee or the union fails to

present a grievance within the specified limits, the

grievance invariably is considered to have been waived.

This also holds true for the appeal of a lower level

decision:

(171) Failure to file a grievance or to process it

within stated periods shall be deemed a waiver of

the grievance . . .

(172) Any grievance not processed in accordance

with the time limits provided above shall be

considered conclusively abandoned . ..
Treatment of management’s failure to respond within

time limits is somewhat more varied. In fact, in most of

the cases where a management response to a grievance is

required within a specified time limit, no penalty is

indicated for failure to respond. (See table 18.)

Most commonly, in cases of management nonresponse, the grievance moves to the next step in the

procedure upon union request:

(173) . . . Grievances not answered by the Employer

within the designated time limits in any step of the

grievance procedure may be appealed to the next

step within 5 days of the expiration of the

designated time limits. . . .

(174) Failure at any step of this procedure to

communicate the decision on a grievance within

the specified time limits shall permit the aggrieved

party to proceed to the next step. Failure at any

step of this procedure to appeal a grievance within

the specified time limits shall be deemed to be

acceptance of the decision rendered at that step.

A small number of contracts require management to

grant the requested remedy if it fails to respond to the

grievance within the specified time limits:

(136) Failure to process the grievance within the time

limits established in the preceding steps presumes

that it has been satisfactorily resolved at the last

step to which it has been properly processed.

Failure on the part of the Fire Department’s

representatives to answer the grievance in the time

limits established in the preceding steps presumes

that the claim made in the grievance is sustained

and that the satisfaction requested will be

provided.

(175) Failure by either party to observe the abovementioned time limits shall presumably resolve the

grievance in favor of the last party to act. Pursuant

to the above 5 steps, failure to observe the time

limits shall be a bar to further proceedings.

Other time limits apply to third party participants.

Only a few contracts establish limits for the preparation

of a written report following investigation by a factfinder. (See table 17.):

(82) If the grievance is still unsettled, either party

may, within 15 days . . . after the reply of the

Personnel Director is due, by written notice to the

other, request a review by a panel, who shall

within 30 days recommend a solution to the

Council. The Council shall render the final decision.

(55) The Advisory Panel shall review the grievance

and within 20 days from date of appointment of a

third member, recommend a solution to the Mayor

and City Council. The Mayor and City Council

shall render the final decision.

As the FMCS statistics indicated, major delays occur

once all procedures short of arbitration have been

exhausted. Consequently, negotiators have attacked the

problem by establishing deadlines on the initiation of

arbitration, the selection of the arbitrator, and on the

delivery of the arbitrator’s decision. These are all less

frequently found than time limits dealing with grievance

phases of the procedure. (See table 17.)

Of the 465 agreements with arbitration procedures,

327, or 70 percent, set deadlines on the initiation of an

appeal to arbitration. Time limits here are greater than

for previous steps in the grievance procedure:

(176) If the problem is not adjusted in the time

specified in Step Two, and involves the application

or interpretation of this agreement, Association

may submit it to arbitration. . . . If a problem is

not submitted to arbitration under this paragraph

within fifteen days after Step Two’s completion, it

will be barred.

(177) If the decision of the Director of Nonacademic

Personnel is not accepted by the employee, the

case, on request of the employee shall be referred

to a Board of Arbitration; constituted in accordance with the provisions of Sections 2, 3, 4

and 5 of Article II above. If referral to a Board of

Arbitration is not requested within 60 calendar days

from the date of the decision of the Director of

Nonacademic Personnel, the case shall be considered as permanently and finally closed.

(178) If a grievance or dispute with respect to the

interpretation or application of any of the terms

of this agreement is not satisfactorily settled, the

union may demand in writing that it be submitted

to arbitration before a Board of Arbitration,

hereinafter described and referred to as the

“Board”, and the District and the union shall

arbitrate such grievances or dispute. This demand

shall be served upon the District within 15 days

from the date of the delivery of the decision of the

General Manager of the District or his representative, on the grievance or dispute rendered in Step

Three of the grievance procedure . . .

Over two-fifths of the arbitration procedures limit

the time to be used in selecting the arbitrator. Once that

time has passed, outside assistance must be sought. As

noted previously, either a list is to be supplied for

further selection by the parties or the outside agency

will make the selection:

(179) The arbitration procedure shall be as follows:

Within 7 working days after a timely request for

arbitration has been received by a party, the

parties shall determine whether they can agree

upon a person to serve as arbitrator. If within this

time they cannot agree, a request shall be made to

the Public Employe Relations Board for a list of 5

persons qualified and willing to serve. Both parties
shall have the right to strike tw o names from the

list; the party requesting arbitration striking the

first name, follow ed by the other party striking a

name, the process being repeated and the remaining person being selected as arbitrator. As an

alternative m ethod, if consented to by both

parties, arbitration may be by a team of three

persons selected as follow s: Each party shall select

a member and the first tw o members shall select a

third member, it being agreed that if within 5 days

they cannot agree upon a third member, he shall

be selected in the same manner as a single

arbitrator is selected when the parties cannot

agree.

(1 8 0 ) If the grievance has not been settled at Step 3

either party may refer it to arbitration within 15

days of the disposition under Step Three. If an

arbitrator cannot be agreed upon within 5 days

after receipt o f the request for arbitration, the

matter will be subm itted to the American Arbitration Association for selection in accordance with

their procedures. . . .

Almost 30 percent of the arbitration procedures Emit

the arbitrator’s amount of time for rendering a decision.

Thirty days is common, however, shorter periods of time

are specified in some agreements:

(1 8 1 ) The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and

binding on the parties, and the arbitrator shall be

requested to issue his decision within 30 days after

the conclusion of testim ony and argument.

(182) The impartial arbitrator shall mail a copy o f his

opinion to the Secretary o f the A uthority and to

the em ployee or his said representative within 5

days after the close o f the hearing before him. . . .

Usually, the arbitrator suffers no penalty for failure

to meet deadlines. A specific reference to take the case

away from the arbitrator under such circumstances was

rare:

(95) The findings o f the arbitrator shall be final and

binding on both parties provided such findings are

delivered to the city and the union within 30 days

of the hearing or the filing of briefs, whichever is

later. If such findings are not filed within the

stated time limit, the arbitrator loses jurisdiction.

Withdrawal o f the grievance. Provisions for the withdrawal of a grievance were negotiated in 7 percent of the

agreements:

Agreem en ts Workers

Total agreements having

grievance procedures. . . 591 802,661

Grievance may be withdrawn ........... 39 29,624

No reference to grievance withdrawal 552 773,037

Among these are clauses placing restrictions on withdrawal or cancelling financial liabilities upon withdrawal.

Provisions generally allow the grievance to be withdrawn at any step of the procedure. Many provisions

state that withdrawal may be made without prejudice,

meaning that withdrawal is not to imply anything

adverse regarding the employee organization’s position

or be detrimental to similar grievances which might be

filed in the future:

(1 8 3 ) The Union may withdraw a grievance w ithout

prejudice at any step o f the grievance procedure.

(1 8 4 ) All decisions of arbitrators consistent w ith

Paragraph 33 and all pre-arbitration grievance

settlem ents reached by the union and the hospital

shall be final, conclusive, and binding on the

hospital, the union, and the em ployees. Provided,

that a grievance may be withdrawn by the union at

any time during Steps 1, 2, or 3 o f the grievance

procedure, and the withdrawal of any grievance

shall not be prejudicial to the positions taken by

the parties as they related to that grievance or any

other grievances.

Some provisions, however, only allow withdrawal

within a few days of introduction of the grievance:

(185) If the matter is not withdrawn by the nurse or

settled within 5 calendar days o f submission to the

Director of Nursing Service, the question shall be

autom atically and im m ediately referred to the

Administrator or his representative and a representative of the A ssociation.

Other procedures disallow withdrawal of any grievance once it is referred to arbitration unless withdrawal

is agreed to by both parties:

(1 8 6 ) A grievance which has been referred to an

arbitrator may not be withdrawn by either party

except by mutual consent.

A grievance once withdrawn can only be reinstated if

the parties agree to it:

(93) The union may withdraw any grievance w ithout prejudice at any step, however, the grievance

withdrawn may not be re-instated.

(91) A grievance may be withdrawn at any level

w ithout prejudice. A grievance may be reopened

within 6 days of its withdrawal if the Board, the

A ssociation and the aggreived person agree.

A number of agreements provide for the cancellation

of financial liabilities upon withdrawal of the grievance:

(1 8 7 ) A grievance may be withdrawn, and, if so

withdrawn, all financial liabilities shall be cancelled. Where one or more grievances involve a

similar issue, these grievances may be withdrawn

pending the disposition of the appeal o f a representative case.
Chapter 5. Appeals From Disciplinary Action

In most instances, appeals from disciplinary action

(i.e., from letters of reprimand, suspensions, demotions,

and so forth) are handled through the regular grievance

procedure, but in 58 agreements out of the 655 studied,

special appeals arrangements were available. Contrary to

nongovernment experience where the normal grievance

procedure is accelerated by skipping earlier steps, these

special arrangements more often provided for a separate

hearing or appeal.

Disciplinary appeals provisions specify the kinds of

actions that are within the scope of the special procedure and also stipulate the grievant’s rights to representation:

(188) Dismissals, suspensions, demotions and disciplinary actions of any type shall not be a subject

for the grievance procedure but shall be processed

according to the procedures of the Personnel

Appeal Board.

(189) Disciplinary hearings. Any disciplinary action

by the Chief of Police, or the Acting Chief, against

any member of the Portland Police Department

covered by this agreement upon any charge of

violation of department rules, inefficiency, incompetence, misconduct, negligence, insubordination, disloyalty or other charge shall be taken only

after due itotice and hearing.

The member so charged shall have the right to

be accompanied by legal counsel at the hearing as

well as by a member of the Board of Directors of

the Police Benefit Association. The policeman so

charged shall have the right to confer with his

counsel at any time during the hearing and shall

have the right to have his counsel speak on his

behalf.

Other clauses briefly indicate applicable laws or codes

outside the grievance procedure available to the disciplined employee in his appeals:

(156) Grievances, disputes, or disagreements involving

removals, demotions, or suspensions shall be resolved as provided by the civil service provisions of

the Santa Monica Municipal Code and the City

Charter.

(190) All disputes concerning disciplinary proceedings shall be resolved under the provisions of

Section 75 of the Civil Service Law only.

(191) If an employee elects to appeal a suspension of

more than 5 days or a dismissal through Civil

Service channels, it may not subsequently be

processed as a grievance.

Where the disciplinary action is upheld, the grievant

in some instances may seek legal remedy:

(192) Any person believing himself aggrieved by a

penalty, or punishment of demotion in or dismissal from service or suspension without pay, or a

fine imposed pursuant to the provisions of this

Section, may appeal from such determination by

an application to the New York Supreme Court in

accordance with the provisions of Article 78 of the

Civil Practice Law and Rules.

(193) An employee so disciplined or discharged shall

be entitled to establish that he did not violate the

provisions of this agreement by filing with the

Board within 10 days after any action has been

taken and the Board shall thereafter, within 10

days commence a proceeding for the purpose of

determining whether or not the employee has

violated this agreement. A decision shall be rendered within 10 days after the hearing and the

employee shall have a right of review by a trial in

the Circuit Court pursuant to the provisions of

3-18-16 and 3-18-17 SDCL 1967.

(194) Any personnel action taken by the Employer

which it is thereafter agreed by him or found by

an arbitrator, the Personnel Division, the Public

Employe Relations Board or a court to have been

improper or contrary to a provision contained in

this agreement shall be promptly corrected, and an

employe deprived of rights by such action shall be

furnished retroactive relief to the extent possible

under law and the rules of the Personnel Division.

Some hearings provisions also deal with the selection

of the hearing officers who, as in the example below,

may not be an employee of the agency involved in the

case:

(195) The hearing upon charges shall be held by a

person or persons designated from a panel established by the Department of Civil Service upon

mutual agreement by the State and CSEA. The

hearing officer so designated shall in no event be

an employee of the same State department or

agency as the employee against whom charges have

been brought. . . .
In seven agreements, a special board was convened

solely for the purpose of hearing appeals of disciplinary

actions. The decision of these boards could generally be

appealed further to arbitration:

(196) No permanent employee shall be dismissed,

discharged, suspended, fined, reduced in rank or

disciplined in any other manner except for just

cause. If any permanent employee is disciplined

and in the judgment of such employee this action

is taken by the City without just cause, he may, no

later than 7 days after the date of such action,

appeal in writing to the Board of Fire Commissioners to have the action rescinded or to have the

severity of the punishment reduced. Within 14

days after receiving such appeal, said Board of Fire

Commissioners shall arrange to and shall meet with

the Union’s Grievance Committee for the purpose

of attempting to resolve this dispute. If such

employee is dissatisfied with results of such

meeting, he may, no later than 7 days thereafter

submit such dispute in writing to the Personnel

Appeals Board. If such Appeals Board fails to

resolve the dispute to the satisfaction of such

employee within 14 days of the date it receives

such dispute, he may, no later than 10 days after

the Appeals Board renders its decision or after the

expiration of such 14 day period, whichever comes

first, submit such dispute to arbitration by the

Connecticut State Board of Mediation and Arbitration or the American Arbitration Association as

noted below and such Board shall hear the dispute

and render a decision which shall be final and

binding on all parties. Said Board of Mediation and

Arbitration shall have the power to uphold the

action of the City or to rescind or modify such

action and such power shall include, but shall not

be limited to the right to reinstate a suspended or

discharged employee with full back pay. Nothing

contained herein shall prevent any employee from

representing himself in these appeal procedures.

Twenty-three of the 58 agreements with a separate

disciplinary procedure include arbitration. One specified

that a member of the clergy would be one of the

neutrals in all disciplinary procedures:

(197) An appeal from an unfavorable decision at Step

IV in the case of a suspension, demotion or

discharge may be initiated by the Association

serving upon the Employer a notice in writing of

its intent to proceed to arbitration within 7 days

after receipt of the Step IV decision. Said notice

shall identify the provisions of the memorandum,

the department, the employe involved, and a copy

of the grievance.

(198) In all cases of disciplinary action including

moral turpitude, the Board of Education shall

select one arbitrator, the other party shall select

one arbitrator, and both arbitrators so selected

shall choose a member of the cloth as the third

arbitrator who shall be the Chairman.

In other cases, the above procedure shall be

followed except that the third member of the

panel may be any impartial person. The expenses

of arbitration shall be divided equally between the

parties.

Most of the agreements containing arbitration as part

of the disciplinary procedure provide that the decision

reached by arbitration will be final and binding rather

than advisory:

(199) In the event that the disciplined employee

rejects the decision of the Executive Director, the

matter may be submitted to binding arbitration.

All requests for binding arbitration shall be filed

within ten working days after receipt of the

decision of the Executive Director. Copy of said

request shall be given to the Authority.

(200) Only the Union may request advisory arbitration on behalf of an employe who has been

disciplined, provided that the action is properly

appealable under the provisions of Section 63.43

of the Wisconsin Statutes in accordance with the

rules and regulations promulgated thereunder by

the Commission. . . .

(201) The decision of the arbitrator in disciplinary

matters under Step 3A above shall not be considered binding on either the Court or the Union,

but shall be advisory in nature and in the event

that either party fails to carry out the decision, the

other party shall have the option, within 7 days

after receipt of the written decision of reopening

the Statement of Policy on those paragraphs giving

rise to the disciplinary action, if any.

A few agreements provide for remedies where disciplinary action is found to be wrong or inappropriate:

(202) In a dispute involving disciplinary action, the

Board, or the arbitrator(s) so selected shall have

the power to uphold the action of the City or to

rescind or modify such action, and such power

shall include, but shall not be limited to the right

to reinstate a suspended or discharged employee

with full back pay.
Region

All agreements

Level of government

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

New England .......................... 75 54,086 16 31,019 1 712 37 12,411 21 9,944

Middle Atlantic ...................... 109 458,236 17 155,007 31 50,514 35 188,498 26 64,217

East North Central.................. 218 170,046 26 20,517 47 24,235 75 48,548 70 76,746

West North Central.................. 40 18,840 6 8,413 9 1,384 10 2,677 15 6,366

South Atlantic ......................... 48 47,594 7 2,191 8 11,482 18 8,843 15 : 25,078

East South Central.................. 6 1,831 1 169 2 1,321 1 100 2 241

West South Central.................. 3 3,861 — — — — 1 700 2 3,161

Mountain................................. 24 8,389 2 1,174 2 188 15 4,871 5 2,156

Pacific ..................................... 132 107,802 7 10,202 38 58,526 61 16,354 26 22,720

Table 2. State and local agreements by size of bargaining unit and level of government, 1972—73

Size of

bargaining unit

All agreements

Level of government

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

50-99 ..................................... 123 8,608 3 229 21 1,426 66 4,665 33 2,288

100-149 ................................. 99 11,512 1 120 24 2,696 48 5,631 26 3,065

150-249 ................................. 97 17,965 11 2,148 16 3,048 47 8,417 23 4,352

250-499 ................................. 122 43,872 18 6,341 33 12,139 41 14,390 30 11,002

500-999 ................................. 79 53,977 14 8,544 12 8,541 26 18,123 27 18,769

1,000-2,999 .......................... 82 139,425 22 38,110 18 33,531 18 29,716 24 38,068

3,000-4,999 .......................... 21 77,092 2 7,200 7 26,407 2 7,200 10 36,285

5,000-9,999 .......................... 18 115,612 5 32,500 5 31,412 1 8,400 7 43,300

10,000-99,999 ...................... 13 282,622 6 133,500 2 29,162 3 66,460 2 53,500

100,000 and over.................... 1 120,000 - - - - 1 120,000 - -

Table 3. Duration of State and local agreements by level of government, 1972—73

Duration

All agreements

Level of government

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Less than 12 months ............. 18 18,595 _ _ 5 8,460 10 5,215 3 4,920

12 m onths............................... 196 219,794 23 122,281 51 38,419 71 16,619 51 42,475

13—23 months........................ 66 81,088 15 38,028 11 8,714 26 11,916 14 22,430

24 m onths............................... 197 180,047 20 28,222 38 57,047 70 23,132 69 71,646

25—35 months........................ 47 74,631 6 5,120 8 13,844 18 10,419 15 45,248

36 months ............................... 89 259,347 10 29,433 19 10,825 39 205,201 21 13,888

More than 36 months............. 42 37,183 8 5,608 6 11,053 19 10,500 9 10,022
Table 4. Occupational coverage of State and local agreements in grievance and arbitration study by employee

organization, 1972—73

Employee organization

Occupation

All agreements

AFL-CIO Independent Association Multiple

Affiliations

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 403 538,563 19 12,942 230 317,933 3 1,247

Blue-collar ............................... 162 103,832 145 90,447 7 6,630 9 5,862 1 893

Professional and/or

technical............................. 129 196,532 30 58,464 - - 99 138,068 - —

Clerical..................................... 20 43,487 7 40,025 — — 12 3,374 1 88

Police and/or f ir e ....................

Blue-collar and

139 62,716 68 27,067 6 4,672 64 30,711 1 266

clerical.................................

Professional and/or

22 14,367 18 12,687 2 510 2 1,170 — —

technical and clerical......... 6 49,783 3 32,000 — — 3 17,783 — -

Blue-collar and professional

and/or technical ...............

Clerical and police

16 18,804 15 18,754 - - 1 50 - -

and/or fire .......................... 1 400 1 400 — — — — — —

General coverage .................... 160 380,764 116 258,719 4 1,130 40 120,915 - —

Table 5. State and local agreements by agency function and level of government, 1972—73

Agency function

All agreements

Level of government

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Agriculture............................... 2 510 2 510 — _ _ _ _ _

Central administration........... 9 26,060 3 20,660 4 4,384 2 1,016 — —

Central services........................ 3 1,147 — — 2 629 1 518 — —

Correctional institutions......... 7 47,060 4 45,950 2 210 1 900 — _

Courts ..................................... 7 3,109 — — 1 3,109 — — _

Education................................. 171 172,313 26 29,434 1 109 - — 144 142,770

Employment compensation . . 5 11,700 5 11,700 - - - - - —

Fire protection........................ 66 19,728 — — 3 2,275 63 17,453 — —

Health and medical.................. 63 59,518 14 26,136 28 16,952 19 15,680 2 750

Law enforcement.................... 71 38,189 2 3,800 15 14,660 54 19,729 — —

Legal departments .................. 1 249 - - - - 1 249 — —

Libraries................................... 1 200 — — — — 1 200 — —

Parks and recreation............... 3 1,635 - — — - 3 1,635 — —

Public transportation............. 31 69,107 1 8,800 1 90 3 1,694 26 58,523

Public utilities ........................ 3 277 — — — — 3 277 — —

Public works............................. 54 20,239 7 9,230 24 4,770 21 5,080 2 1,159

Regulating agencies ............... 3 4,350 3 4,350 - - - - - -

Sanitation................................. 6 3,670 — — 1 850 5 ' 2,820 — —

Social welfare.......................... 14 30,979 3 8,500 9 2,079 2 20,400 _ _

Urban development................ 7 7,377 - - - - - — 7 7,377

Multiple agency coverage .... 128 353,268 12 59,622 41 98,245 74 195,351 1 50
1972—73

Level of government

Grievance

procedure

/-nii agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agree*

ments Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Reference to

grievance procedure........... 597 805,210 80 218,769 123 142,633 222 239,510 172 204,298

Agreements specifying grievance ........... 591 802,661 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 203,998

Agency procedure only .. 58 160,538 7 4,590 22 21,587 26 127,046 3 7,315

Negotiated procedure only 512 609,519 64 191,329 97 118,761 185 108,506 166 190,923

Agency and

negotiated

procedure .. . 21 32,604 9 22,850 3 2,185 7 1,809 2 5,760

Optional .. 17 11,876 7 7,250 3 2,185 6 881 1 1,560

Varies for

different

steps . . 4 20,728 2 15,600 1 928 1 4,200

Subject to negotiations. 6 2,549 _ _ 1 100 4 2,149 1 300

No reference to grievance

procedure .......................... 58 65,475 2 9,923 15 5,729 31 43,492 10 6,331

Table 7. Scope of grievance procedure in State and local agreements by level of government, 1972—73

Level of government

Grievance

procedure

All agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Agreements with grievance

procedures.......................... 591 802,661 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 283,998

Total with scope of

grievance procedure........... 536 755,505 78 217,551 96 124,345 201 229,662 161 183,947

All disputes .................. 103 68,316 11 19,432 20 11,803 45 10,893 27 26,138

Interpretation or

application

of agreement........... 433 687,189 67 198,119 76 112,542 156 218,769 134 157,759

Scope not defined .................. 55 47,156 2 1,218 26 18,188 17 7,699 10 20,051
Level of government

Specific inclusions and

exclusions

mii agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements

Wor kers Agreements

Workers Agreements

Workers AgreementsWorkers Agreements

Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Agreements with grievance

procedures .......................... 591 802,661 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 203,998

Specific inclusions.................. 98 143,964 10 34,856 29 38,582 38 28,922 21 41,604

Specific exclusions.................. 50 80,731 6 24,869 20 38,706 13 5,847 11 11,309

Disciplinary

action ...................... 19 24,952 2 8,200 6 5,686 7 3,257 4 7,809

Other than

disciplinary

action1 .................... 11 15,906 2 12,169 1 100 3 712 5 2,925

Disciplinary action and

non-discipl inary

issues........................ 18 38,093 1 3,200 13 32,920 3 1,878 1 95

Issues covered by laws,

rules or

regulations................ 2 1,780 1 1,300 1 480

1 Item s freq u en tly m entioned w ere th e rate o f com pensation,

retirem en t benefits, position classifications, the results o f Civil

Service exam inations and reductions in force.

NOTE: Nonadditive.
Table 9. Employee organization role in grievance procedures by level of government and employee organization in

State and local agreements, 1972—73

Employee organization role in

Employee handling an individual grievance

Levei of government

All agreements

/-\yreemem.5

with grievance

procedures

organization

may initiate

grievance Total Must represent

Agreements

Workers Agreements

Workers Agreements Workers Agreements

Workers Agreements

Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 591 802,661 140 315,205 385 565,855 119 77,729

State.......................................... 82 228,692 80 218,769 31 154,636 61 208,046 17 16,016

County..................................... 138 148,362 122 142,533 25 31,594 78 101,644 27 6,741

Municipal................................. 253 283,002 218 237,361 43 51,664 144 100,718 52 40,465

Special district........................ 182 210,629 171 203,998 41 77,311 102 155,447 23 14,507

EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 591 802,661 140 315,205 385 565,855 119 77,729

AFL-CIO ................................. 403 538,563 381 487,876 89 151,172 256 313,168 98 64,388

Independent ............................. 19 12,942 18 12,832 1 350 11 6,030 3 590

Associations............................. 230 317,933 190 300,972 49 162,790 118 246,657 18 12,751

Combinations.......................... 3 1,247 2 981 1 893 - - - -

Employee organization role in

handling an individual grievance Representative Reference to

not from employee

Has right

to

attend

Attendance

not

required

employee

organization

permitted

organization

grievance

committee

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................... 142 226,447 124 261,679 82 107,104 167 98,321

State ............................................ 22 39,852 22 152,178 17 21,495 12 14,030

County........................................ 35 66,770 16 28,133 11 30,981 42 16,763

Municipal................................... 43 22,354 49 37,899 20 6,303 73 41,181

Special district........................... 42 97,471 37 43,469 34 48,325 40 26,347

EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION

T o ta l........................... 142 226,447 124 261,679 82 107,104 167 98,321

AFL-CIO ................................... 86 137,156 72 111,624 49 51,917 118 67,636

Independent ............................... 7 5,040 1 400 — — 3 293

Associations........................ . . . 49 84,251 51 149,655 33 55,187 45 29,499

Combinations............................. - - - - - - 1 893

N O T E : N onadd itive.
Table 10. Selected grievance resolution procedures 'n State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73

Level of government

Selected grievance

resolution procedure

m ii agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Agreements with

grievance procedures 591 802,661 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 203,998

Total with selected

grievance resolution

procedure ........................... 496 745,889 70 207,292 102 129,102 175 225,876 149 183,619

Factfinding.................... 13 10,256 — — — — 4 436 9 9,820

Mediation...................... 15 3,882 1 366 2 510 9 2,688 3 318

Arbitration.................... 444 717,285 65 197,936 97 128,031 155 219,845 127 171,473

Factfinding and

arbitration............... 8 2,548 2 905 6 1,643

Mediation and

arbitration............... 16 11,918 4 8,990 3 561 5 2,002 4 365

No selected procedure........... 95 56,772 10 11,477 20 13,431 43 11,485 22 20,379

Total with selected

grievance resolution

procedures1 ...................... 496 745,889 70 207,292 102 129,102 175 225,876 149 183,619

Total with

factfinding............... 21 12,804 6 1,341 15 11,463

Total with

mediation ............... 31 15,800 5 9,356 5 1,071 14 4,690 7 683

Total with

arbitration............... 468 731,751 69 206,926 100 128,592 162 222,752 137 173,481

1 N o n ad d itive.

Table 11. Arbitration referral procedures instate and local agreements by level of government, 1972—73

Level of government

Procedure for referral

to arbitration

mm ayreemem.:*

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Total agreements

with

arbitration ......... 465 730,391 68 205,926 100 128,592 160 222,392 137 173,481

Agreements with referral

procedures.......................... 438 700,122 66 203,799 93 119,728 151 217,570 128 159,025

Mutual consent............. 14 5,690 1 600 2 149 4 723 7 4,218

Either p a rty .................. 198 260,267 36 130,667 44 29,131 80 47,414 38 53,055

Union o n ly.................... 174 373,836 21 58,562 39 69,981 53 165,499 61 79,794

Employee o nly............. 22 36,860 5 8,540 4 13,782 1 70 12 14,468

Either union or

employee.................. 27 23,062 2 5,250 4 6,685 12 3,767 9 7,360

Automatically ............. 3 407 1 180 - - 1 97 1 130

Reference to arbitration;

no reference to

referral ............................... 27 30,269 2 2,127 7 8,864 9 4,822 9 14,456
Level of government

Provision State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Agreements with

arbitration ......... 465 730,391 68 205,926 100 128,592 160 222,392 137 173,481

STATUS OF

ARBITRATOR

Ad hoc (temporary)............... 410 518,322 63 196,436 91 117,311 134 73,560 122 131,015

Permanent ............................... 19 64,056 1 500 5 8,003 8 22,023 5 33,530

No reference to status

of arbitrator ...................... 36 148,013 4 8,990 4 3,278 18 126,809 10 8,936

ARBITRATION

MACHINERY

Total referring to type

of machinery...................... 441 571,145 65 198,286 96 126,955 149 76,967 131 168,937

Single arbitrator........... 310 491,937 56 195,207 67 107,958 97 58,816 90 129,956

Arbitration board......... 106 64,165 7 2,449 26 15,724 38 8,550 35 37,442

Optional........................ 15 12,152 2 630 3 3,273 6 7,280 4 969

State agency —

no detail .................. 10 2,891 - - - - 8 2,321

i

2 Ii

I

570
Level of government

Selection of

arbitrator

All agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements

Workers Agreements Workers

Total agreements

with arbitration . 465 730,391 68 205,926 100 128,592 160 222,392 137 173,481

Reference to selection of ad

hoc arbitrator or

chairperson........................ 410 518,322 63 196,436 91 117,311 134 73,560 122 131,015

Agency and union

select....................... 39 31,098 4 13,450 10 6,502 12 2,539 13 8,607

If parties unable to

agree, outside

agency provides

lis t............................. 199 198,913 45 61,466 30 43,691 65 34,405 59 59,351

If parties unable to

agree, outside agency

selects1 .................... 59 43,015 2 506 23 34,997 18 2,993 16 4,519

Apsncy and union

u^ect from outside

agency lis t............... 75 210,938 12 121,014 15 17,397 21 15,769 27 56,758

Outside agency

appoints .................. 29 20,805 12 14,474 11 5,026 6 1,305

Other methods

indicated2 ............... 9 13,553 - 1 250 7 12,828 1 475

Reference to selection of

permanent arbitrator

or chairperson.................... 19 64,056 1 500 5 8,003 8 22,023 5 33,530

Named in agreement . . . 5 33,008 - - - - 2 708 3 32,300

Agency and union

appoint.................... 6 1,705 1 500 2 515 3 690 _ _

Selection made from

permanent panel . . . 2 20,480 _ _ _ 1 20,000 1 480

If parties unable to

agree, selection

is made according

to American Arbitration Association

rules ........................ 2 6,593 2 6,593

Other methods

indicated3 ........ 4 2,270 - 1 895 2 625 1 750

Reference to outside

agency used in

arbitration.......................... 393 510,934 61 184,876 83 117,402 134 81,569 115 127,087

Federal Mediation and

Conciliation

Service............. 24 11,852 1 900 1 400 18 7,789 4 2,763

American Arbitration

Association............. 188 202,645 34 38,982 38 40,559 53 28,291 63 94,813

State or local

labor agency........... 156 263,923 22 131,070 40 64,692 51 39,470 43 28,691

American Arbitration

Association or,

State or local labor

agency ...................... 13 23,280 2 8,100 2 11,600 7 3,181 2 399

Judge ............................. 6 435 - — 1 61 3 153 2 221

Choice between alternative agencies......... 6 8,799 2 5,824

___1

90 2 2,685 1 200

1 Includes 11 agreements covering 3 3 ,3 6 3 em ployees in Los

Angeles C oun ty w hich provide fo r selection by th e parties, if

th ey are unable to agree, a local agency appoints the arb itrato r.

2 In other agreements an outside agency w o uld act as

a rb itrato r, a judge w o uld au to m atically select an arb itrato r or

th e agency and union w o uld select fro m a list in th e agreem ent.

If th e parties were unable to agree a judge could m ake the

selection or a S tate agency m em ber could be appo inted.

3 O ther m ethods include selection fro m a local bar associatio n , or, in th e case o f impasse, by th e A m erican A rb itra tio n

Association; and by a governor and c ity com m ission. In one

instance a local civil service board au to m atically acted as an

arb itratio n panel.

N O T E : Nonadditive.
Level of government

Status of arbitrator's

decision

m ii agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

Agreements with

arbitration.......................... 465 730,391 68 205,926 100 128,592 160 222,392 137 173,481

Reference to status of

arbitrator's

decision............................... 439 582,995 64 198,060 94 119,124 150 98,516 131 167,295

Advisory........................ 45 81,167 4 6,019 22 58,771 3 2,638 16 13,739

Binding.......................... 381 473,823 58 181,541 70 57,658 144 94,838 109 139,786

Varies with

grievance issue......... 13 28,005 2 10,500 2 2,695 3 1,040 6 13,770

No reference to status

of arbitrator's

decision............................... 26 147,396 4 7,866 6 9,468 10 123,876 6 6,186

Table 15. Level of decision when other than arbitration in State and local agreement grievance procedures by

level of government, 1972—73 ____________

Level of government

Level of decision

m ii agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements WorkersAgreements Workers

Ag-'eern ^ n i

. , kers Agre-'-

men ts Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l.......................... 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 !■- 3,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Agreements with grievance procedures ................... 591 802,661 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 203,998

Final decision other

than arbitration................... 95 50,554 6 3,233 18 15,388 40 8,529 31 23,404

Management

o fficial........................ 54 29,347 4 2,775 11 10,435 25 5,170 14 10,967

Management

official with

results of

factfinding................. 13 10,256 4 436 9 9,820

M ediation........................ 14 3,741 1 366 2 510 8 2,547 3 318

Labor-management

committee1 .............. 4 1,560 _ _ _ _ 2 235 2 1,325

Court of Law2 .............. 6 4,194 — — 4 3,943 1 141 1 110

State agencies .............. 4 1,45F 1 92 1 500 — — 2 864

1 Contains 3 agreements covering 1 ,400 w o rkers w itn bi- 2 Includes one agreem ent covering 141 w orkers w h ich firs t

partite com m ittees and 1 agreem ent covering 1 60 w o rk a rs w it h attem pts settlem ent by m ed iation ,

tripartite com m ittee.
Table 16. Personnel eligible for official time allowances in State and local agreements, 1972—73

Personnel eligible

Official

time

Official time allowance

for—

Grievance

preparation

and processing

Arbitration

Agreem ents Workers Agreem ents Workers Agreements Workers

Total....................................... 285 339,685 280 334,160 40 47,314

Grievant................................................... 107 164,360 101 156,897 28 40,309

Union representative............................. 259 301,085 259 301,085 32 38,788

Employee witness ................................. 37 42,291 27 35,243 24 31,474

N O T E : N o nadd itive. A greem ent m ay contain m ore than one provision.

Table 17. Time limits on grievance and arbitration procedures in State and local agreements by level of government,

1972-73

Level of government

Impost ion of

time limits

All agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Total agreements with

grievance

procedures......... ............. 59 - • 80 218,769 122 142,533 218 237,361 171 203,998

Total agreements with

grievance time

lim its................................... 528 645,151 75 214,809 107 1 27,976 190 109,451 156 192,915

Time limit on:

Grievance

initiation.................. 372 551,994 65 208,468 63 88,747 133 92,346 111 162,433

Management

response ................. 483 513,493 73 214,363 96 119,391 174 105,086 140 180,653

Appeal to higher

level.......................... 437 606,336 70 213,692 88 117,674 151 100,502 128 174,468

Factfinding

report ...................... 21 31,160 2 780 4 13,909 5 1,121 10 15,350

Invoking

arbitration............... 327 504,928 59 189,540 68 90,356 105 84,729 95 140,303

Selection of

arbitrator.................. 197 215,516 41 57,517 38 63,676 56 35,322 62 58,991

Arbitrator's

decision.................... 137 189,901 23 32,603 23 24,975 37 23,615 54 108,708

N O T E : N onadd itive.
Table 18. Effect of management nonobservance of time limits in State and local agreements by level of

government, 1972—73

Level of government

Effect of

nonobservance

am agreements

State County Municipal Special district

Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers Agreements Workers

T o ta l........................ 655 870,685 82 228,692 138 148,362 253 283,002 182 210,629

Total reference to time

limit on management response.................... 483 619,493 73 214,363 96 119,391 174 105,086 140 180,653

Total with penalty for

nonobservance

of time limit ...................... 137 314,880 23 121,256 25 74,511 39 46,458 50 72,655

Grievance advances

to next step............. 114 301,264 20 118,446 21 69,786 29 43,393 44 69,639

Remedy granted........... 23 13,616 3 2,810 4 4,725 10 3,065 6 3,016

No reference to penalty......... 346 304,613 50 93,107 71 44,880 135 58,628 90 107,998
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Appendix A. Identification of Clauses

Employee organization affiliated with the AFL-CIO unless otherwise indicated as

independent union or association.

Employer and union

Plainfield, N.J.; public w o r k s...................................................

Teamsters (IBT) (Ind.)

New York, N.Y.; licensed unit ..........................................................

Marine Engineers Beneficial Association (MEBA)

St. Louis County, Mo.; Dept, of Hospitals, Highways, Parks . .

and Recreation

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Tioga County, N.Y.; co u n ty w id e.......................................................

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

Ontario, Calif. ......................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Pennsylvania; Liquor Law Enforcement U n it..................................

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (Ind.)

Dayton, Ohio; public works ..............................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Washington; Employment Security Dept.............................................

Washington Fed. of State Employees

Ohio; Youth Com m ission....................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Oakland, Calif.; supervisory em p loyees.............................................

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

Jersey City, N.J.; Medical Center, practical, graduate and . - -

public health nurses

United Nurses Organization (Ind.)

Jersey City, N.J.; public w o r k s..........................................................

Jersey City Public Employees, Inc. (Ind.)

Bangor, Maine ......................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Winnebago County, Wise.; Highway Dept...........................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Wisconsin; Health and Social Services................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Jefferson County, Wise.; public health ............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Cumberland, Md.; c ity w id e .................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Washington; Highway Dept....................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

Manitowoc County, Wise.; Highway Dept........................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Warren, Mich.; Board of E d u cation...................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Inglewood, Calif.......................................................................................

Inglewood Firemens Association (Ind.)

Waterbury, Conn.; blue collar em p lo y ees.........................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Charleston, W. Va.; Transportation Authority ...............................

Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU)

District of Columbia; Dept, of Highways and T r a ffic .....................

Government Employees (AFGE)

Lincoln, Neb.; city w id e ........................................................................

State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Pierce County, Wash.; Hospital C ou n cil.............................................

Wash. State Nurses Association (Ind.)

Onondaga County, N.Y.; countyw ide................................................

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

Boston, Mass.; Public Welfare Dept.................... .................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Massachusetts; Metropolitan District Commission ........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Boulder, Colo............................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Meriden, Conn..........................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Springfield, Mass.; School Committee .............................................

Springfield Public School Custodians Association (Ind.)

Michigan; University of M ichigan.......................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Livonia, Mich............................................................................................

Livonia Police Officers Association (Ind.)

Port Jefferson Station, N.Y.; Board of Education ........................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Joliet, 111.; Police Dept............................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Boston, Mass.; Public Library..............................................................

Boston Public Library Professional Staff Association (Ind.)

Lansing, Mich.; School B o a r d ..............................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Alexandria, Va.; Board of Education . .............................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Michigan; Ferris State College ..........................................................

Ferris State College Clerical and Technical Association (Ind.)

Reno, Nev.; city w i d e ...........................................................................

Reno Municipal Employees Association (Ind.)

East Hartford, Conn.; c ity w id e ..........................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Anchorage, Alaska; Municipal light and Power Dept....................

Electrical Workers (IBEW)

Lincoln, Neb.............................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)
45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

Springfield, Mass.; School Committee .........................................

Springfield School Cafeteria Employees Association (Ind.)

Allegheny County, Penn.; countywide .........................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

Lansing, Mich.; citywide .................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Portland, Ore.; city wide ..............................................................

Dist. Council of Trade Unions

Macomb County, Mich.; Road Commission..................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Montana; Dept, of In stitu tio n s.......................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

North Dakota; Highway Dept.............................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Michigan; Northern Michigan University ......................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Livonia, Mich.........................................................................................

Livonia Fire Fighters Association (Ind.)

Plainfield, N.J.; Fire Dept...................................................................

Mutual Benevolent Association (Ind.)

Cumberland, Md...................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Erie County, N.Y.; county w id e .......................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Old Orchard Beach, Me.; School B o a r d .........................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

District of Columbia; Board of Education ..................................

Teachers (AFT)

Fairfax County, Va.; countyw ide...................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Lorain, Ohio; Board of Education ................................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Cranston, R.I.........................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Aurora, 111.......................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Grays Harbor, Wash.; citywide .......................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

New York; Security Services Unit ................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Oakland County, Mich.; Board of A uditors...............................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Pueblo County, Colo.; Public W elfare.........................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Pawtucket, R.I.; School Committee ......................................... ...

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

San Francisco, Calif.; Police Dept.................................................. ...

Police Officers Association (Ind.)

Orange County, Calif.; cou n tyw id e................................................

Orange County Employees Association (Ind.)

Washington; Dept, of Social and Health S e rv ices.....................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)
71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

Marshall, Minn.; School Board ..............................................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Boston, Mass.; city w id e ...........................................................................

Mass. Nurses Assn. (Ind.)

Boston, Mass.; Police Dept.........................................................................

Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association, Inc. (Ind.)

Cleveland, Ohio; Board of E d u cation ...................................................

Teachers (AFT)

Paducah, Ky.; city w i d e ...........................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Youngstown, Ohio; Police Dept................................................................

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (Ind.)

Buffalo, N.Y.; Board of E d u cation .......................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Los Angeles County, Calif.; Board of Supervisors...............................

Supervisory Professional Paramedical-Health Employees,

Service Employees (SEIU)

Battle Creek, Mich.; c ity w id e .................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

District of Columbia; Dept, of General Services ...............................

Bureau of Repairs and Improvements, Government Employees

(AFGE)

Decatur, 111.; Board of E d ucation..........................................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

Hagerstown, Md.; city w i d e ................................................................. ...

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

San Francisco, Calif.; Public Utilities Commission ........................ ...

Transport Workers (TWU)

Schenectady, N.Y.; School D istr ic t................................................... ...

Teachers (AFT)

San Francisco, Calif.....................................................................................

Dept, of Public Health-Laguna Honda Hospital, Service

Employees (SEIU)

Casper, Wyo.; School D istrict.................................................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

Waterbury, Conn.; city w id e .....................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Oneida County, Wise.; Highway Committee .................................. ...

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Hartford, Conn.; Metropolitan D istr ic t................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Pierce County, Wash.; County Commissioners ..................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Phoenix, Ariz.; Wilson School District No. 7 ......................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Massachusetts; Division of Employment Security........................ =

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Detroit, Mich.; Dept, of Street Railways ............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Andover, Mass.; c ity w id e .................................................................... ...

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Fond du Lac, Wise.......................................................................................

Fond du Lac Professional Policemen’s Association (Ind.)
96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

Wilmington, Del.; Police Dept..................................................

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (Ind.)

Dade County, Fla.; countyw ide.............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Grand Rapids, Mich.; citywide .............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Rochester, Mich.; Board of Education ...............................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Adrian, Mich.; Dept, of Public W orks..................................

Steelworkers (USA)

Detroit, Mich.; Dept, of Street Railways ...........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

West Hartford, Conn.; Police Dept..........................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

East Detroit, Mich.; Multi-unit .............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Los Angeles County, Calif.; Paramedical Technical and . .

Institutional Support Services Units

Service Employees (SEIU)

Buffalo, N.Y.; c ity w id e ..........................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Anoka, Minn.; School District ............................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

District of Columbia; Dept, of Sanitary Engineering — . ,

Revenue Branch

Government Employees (AFGE)

New Britain, Conn.; Board of Education . . .................

Teachers (AFT)

Rockford, 111...............................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Salt Lake City, Utah; Board of Education ........................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Huntington, W. Va.; Dept, of Public W orks........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Waterloo, I A.; city w i d e ..........................................................

Laborers (LIUNA)

New York; Professional, Scientific and Technical Unit . .

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

New York; Executive B ran ch ................................................

Senate Professional Association (Ind.)

Trenton, Mich.; Dept, of Public Works ...............................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Jersey City, N.J.; city hall ................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Amsterdam, N.Y.; Dept, of Public W orks........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Dayton, Ohio; ........................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Lewiston, Me.; city w id e.......................................................

State, county and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Tucson, Ariz.; Police Dept.....................................................

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (Ind.)
121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

Newark, N.J.; Fire Dept............................................................

Teamsters (IBT) (Ind.)

New York, N.Y.; Transit A uthority.............................................

Transit Union (ATU)

Rochester, N.Y..................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

New York, N.Y.; Social Services ................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Milwaukee County, Wise.; co u n ty w id e ......................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Milwaukee County, Wise.; Staff N u rses......................................

Staff Nurses Council of Milwaukee (Ind.)

Port Washington, N.Y.; School D istrict......................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Grand Rapids, Mich....................................................................... =

Firefighters (IAFF)

Newark, N.J.; Board of Education .............................................

Teachers (AFT)

Morgantown, W. Va.; West Virginia U n iversity........................

Laborers (LIUNA)

Missouri; Division of Mental H ea lth ..................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

New Mexico; Dept, of Hospitals and Institutions.....................

Carpenters (C JA)

District of Columbia .....................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Albany, N.Y.; School D istrict.......................................................

Faculty Association (Ind.)

St. Louis County, Mo.; Welfare Dept. . .....................

Service Employees (SEIU)

Littleton, Colo...................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Walla Walla, Wash..............................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

West Hartford, Conn.; city w id e ...................................................

West Hartford Municipal Employees Joint Council (Ind.)

Eugene, Ore.; Police Dept................................................................

Eugene Police Patrolman’s Association (Ind.)

Monroe County, N.Y.; Social Services ......................................

Monroe County Federation of Social Workers (Ind.)

Manitowoc County, Wise.; County Courthouse........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Los Angeles County, Calif.; Appraisers......................................

Marine Engineers (MEBA)

Tennessee; Dept, of Public Health ............................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Akron, Ohio; Board of Education ............................................

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Los Angeles County, Calif.; Central Services ...........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Schenectady, N.Y..............................................................................

Schenectady Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association (Ind.)
147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

Delaware; Dept, of Health and Social Services ..................................

Laborers (LIUNA)

New Castle, Pa.; Public Works Dept.........................................................

Laborers (LIUNA)

Michigan; University of Michigan-Maintenance E m p lo y ees..............

Washtenaw County Building and Construction Trades Council

Milwaukee, Wise.; Health Dept..................................................................

Staff Nurses’ Council (Ind.)

Richmond, Ind............................................................................... ... -

Firefighters (IAFF)

Cortland County, N.Y.; countywide ............................................

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

Decatur, 111.; cityw id e ...........................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Allegany County, Md.; Board of Education.........................................

Allegany County Council of School Personnel Organizations

(Ind.)

Belleville, 111.; Belleville Township High School-custodial

and maintenance employees

Service Employees (SEIU)

Santa Monica, Calif.; Motor Coach Operators......................................

Transportation Union (UTU)

Bellingham, Wash.........................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Seattle, Wash.; Transit Com m ission................................................... ...

Transit Union (ATU)

East Providence, R.I.; Public Works Dept...............................................

Steelworkers (USA)

Delaware; Delaware Home and Hospital for the Chronically 111 . . .

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Groton, Conn.; citywide ........................................................................

Town of Groton Municipal Employees (Ind.)

Vermont; statew id e.................................. ...............................................

Vermont State Employees Association (Ind.)

District of Columbia, Dept, of Recreation .........................................

Government Employees (AFGE)

Cook County, 111.; Health and Hospitals Governing...........................

Committee

Teamsters (IBT) (Ind.)

Massachusetts; Commissioner of B a n k s................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Toledo, O h i o .............................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Berrien County, Mich.; Benton Harbor Area S c h o o ls........................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Kettering, Ohio; Police Dept..............................................................

Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) (Ind.)

Westport, Conn.; Board of Education................................................ ...

National Education Association (NEA) (Ind.)

Osseo, Minn.; Board of Education .......................................................

Service Employees (SEIU)

Framingham, Mass.; School C om m ittee................................................

Laborers (LIUNA)
172

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

Dade County, Fla.; Board of County Commissioners-Port Authority . .

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Wisconsin; Blue Collar Non-building Trades-technical and .............. .

Security Public Safety Bargaining units

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Massachusetts; Southern Mass. University ................................................

Teachers (AFT)

Marathon County, Wise.; Highway Dept........................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

New York; Central General Hospital ..........................................................

New York State Nurses Association (Ind.)

Illinois; University of I llin o is ........................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

California; Southern Calif. Rapid Transit D istrict................. ....................

Transit Union (ATU)

Oregon; Eastern Oregon Hospital and Training Center ................. ... .

Oregon State Employees Association (Ind.)

Massachusetts; Dept, of Mental H e a lt h ................................................ , .

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Minnesota; Mankato State College ..............................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

New York, N.Y.; Transit A uthority..............................................................

Transport Workers (TWU)

Detroit, Mich.; city wide-master a greem en t................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Cleveland, Ohio; Highland View H ospital...................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

King County, Wash.; Valley General H ospital.............................................

Nurses Association (ANA) (Ind.)

Flint, Mich.; Hurley H o sp ita l........................................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Pontiac, Mich.; Board of E ducation..............................................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Oakland County, Mich.; Probate Court-Caseworker Employees .....

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Portland, Me.; Police Dept................................................................................

Police Benevolent Association (PBA) (Ind.)

Syracuse, N.Y.; Police Dept....................................................................... .

Syracuse Police Benevolent Association (Ind.)

Bergen County, N.J.; Sheriffs Dept.................................................................

Police Benevolent Association (PBA) (Ind.)

Erie County, N.Y.; Sheriffs Dept.....................................................................

Badge and Shield Employees Association (Ind.)

South Dakota; Board of Charities and C orrections..................................

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

Oregon; Dept, of Agriculture.............................................................

Oregon State Employees Association

New York; Institutional Employees U n i t ...................................................

Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) (Ind.)

Bristol, Conn.......................................................................................................

Firefighters (IAFF)

Pennsylvania; Dept, of Health and Public Welfare . .................

Penn. Nurses Association (Ind.)
198 Norwalk, Conn.; Board of E ducation.......................................................... June 1973

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

199 New Jersey; Turnpike A u th o r ity ....................................................... ... June 1974

Professional and Technical Engineers (AFTE)

200 Milwaukee, Wise.; c ity w id e ................................................................. ... . November 1972

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

201 Cuyahoga County, Ohio; Juvenile C o u r t..................................................... January 1974

State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

202 New Haven, Conn............................................................................................... July 1973

Firefighters (IAFF)
Appendix B. Complete Grievance and

Arbitration Provisions

From the agreement between:

The City of Toledo, Ohio; city wide agreement,

and the American Federation of State, County and

Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

A R TIC LE V Grievance Procedure

Any grievance or dispute which may arise between

the parties, including the application, meaning or

interpretation of this Agreement, shall be settled in the

following manner.

Section 1. It is the mutual desire of the city and the

union to provide for the prompt adjustment of grievances in a fair and reasonable manner, with a minimum

amount of interruption of the work schedules. Every

reasonable effort shall be made by both the city and the

union to effect the resolution of grievances at the

earliest step possible. In the furtherance of this objective, the following procedure shall be followed.

First step. When an employee has a grievance, the

employee, with his steward or alternate steward, shall

verbally discuss the matter with the employee’s immediate supervisor and attempt to resolve the problem. The

grievance must be brought to the attention of the

immediate supervisor within 7 calendar days of the

employees having, through the exercise of reasonable

diligence, gained knowledge that a grievance exists. If

the grievance can not be resolved through verbal

discussion, then it shall be reduced to writing and

presented to the immediate supervisor. The supervisor

shall indicate thereon, in writing, his response to the

grievance by the end of the shift, on the second work

day following the day on which the written grievance

was presented. The written grievance containing the

response of the supervisor shall then be delivered to

Local 7 for further handling at the next step of this

procedure.

Second step. Grievances not settled in the first step

shall be delivered to the Personnel and Labor Relations

office on Thursday afternoon of each week, as early as is

practicable for the union. The personnel department will

promptly prepare and publish an agenda of all grievances. There shall be a weekly meeting held in the

personnel department at such day and time as may be

designated by the Director of Personnel and Labor

Relations and the President of Local 7, or their

designees, for the purpose of discussing and resolving

outstanding grievances. Either side may request that a

grievance be held over for the following weekly meeting,

in which case the grievance held over shall appear on the

following weekly agenda. After a grievance has been held

over once, at the request of either side, any additional

hold over shall only be by the mutual consent of both

the city and the union. In the event that the city fails to

answer a grievance at the time required in this step of

the grievance procedure, or if the union fails to appeal

the answer given at the weekly meeting to the next step

of the grievance procedure, then the grievance will be

considered settled against the side which defaulted.

Grievances settled by default can not be the basis of

establishing precedent for the settlement of any future

grievances. Any grievance not settled at this step of the

grievance procedure shall be referred to the third step of

this procedure.

Third step. Grievances not settled at the second step

of this procedure shall be referred by letter to the Office

of the City Manager and the Office of the Director of

District Council 46 of AFSCME. The Director of the

District Council and the City Manager or persons

designated by them shall arrange a meeting at a mutually

acceptable date and time within 15 calendar days after

the grievance has been referred to them for the purpose

of attempting to resolve the matter. Within 7 calendar

days after such meeting the city shall advise the union as

to the decision of the city manager on the matter. In the

event that the grievance is still not satisfactorily settled,

then the union shall have the right to appeal the

grievance to the fourth step of this procedure.

Fourth step. If the decision of the city as given in the

third step of the grievance procedure is not satisfactory,

then the union shall notify the city in writing within 7

calendar days after the answer of the city manager that
the grievance is to be submitted to arbitration. When a

grievance is submitted to arbitration, the union shall

notify the City as to the name of their arbitrator and the

city shall notify the Union as to the name of their

arbitrator within 7 calendar days after the notice of the

city of the desire of the union to arbitrate the matter.

The two arbitrators so named shall then meet at a date

and time mutually agreeable, within 7 calendar days to

select a third arbitrator. Upon the failure of the 2

arbitrators to be able to agree upon a third arbitrator,

both parties agree to ask the Toledo Labor-Management-Citizens Committee to submit a list of 5 names of

citizen members of the committee who are available for

service as arbitrators. The city and the union representatives shall alternately strike 1 name from the list. The

side to strike the first name shall be chosen by lot. The

person whose name has been chosen shall become the

third member and shall serve as chairman of the panel.

The panel shall meet as promptly as possible. The fees

and expenses of the third arbitrator shall be paid by the

party against whom the arbitrator renders an adverse

decision. In the event more than one grievance is

referred to the same hearing, the costs of the arbitration

shall be divided proportionately, the loser bearing the

proportionate share of the costs for the cases lost. All

other expense for witnesses or otherwise shall be borne

by the party incurring the cost. However, any city

employee called as a witness by either side will continue

to receive his regular rate of pay while attending such

hearing, not to exceed the normal 8 hours he would have

worked.

From the agreement between:

The City of Bangor, Maine; Public Services Dept.,

Operation and Maintenance Division, and the

American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

A R TIC LE 22 Grievance Procedure

The purpose of the grievance procedure shall be to

settle employee grievances on as low an administrative

level as possible, so as to insure efficiency and maintain

morale.

A grievance shall be considered to be a union complaint

concerned with:

1. Discharge, suspension, or other disciplinary

action.

2. Interpretation and application of Public Services Department rules and regulations.

3. Alleged violation of any of the terms of this

agreement.

The union member shall within 7 calendar days after

the occurrence of the alleged grievance present his

grievance in writing to the shop steward and/or president

of the local union, who in turn shall settle same with the

foreman and/or other supervisors if possible. If the

grievance is not settled at the supervisor’s level within 7

calendar days then the grievance shall be submitted to

the Public Services Director in writing.

The Public Services Director shall deal with the

grievance submitted and shall render his decision to the

union and to the city manager in writing, not later than

the seventh calendar day following the day the grievance

was received by him.

If the decision of the Public Services Director is not

satisfactory to the President of the Local Union, an

appeal shall be lodged with the Personnel Director

and/or the City Manager within 10 calendar days. The

Personnel Director and/or the City Manager shall, within

10 calendar days of receipt of the grievance, submit his

decision in writing to the President of the Local Union

and the Public Services Director.

In the event that the union feels that further review is

desired, the City Manager shall be requested within 10

calendar days in writing to bring the matter before the

City Council or a committee thereof. The council or a

committee thereof may call a hearing and shall, within

21 calendar days of receipt of grievance, or 10 calendar

days after hearing, whichever period is longer, submit

their decision in writing to the President of the Local

Union and the City Manager.

If the grievance is still unsettled, either party may,

within 15 calendar days after the reply of the council or

a committee thereof is due, by written notice to the

other request advisory arbitration.

Nothing in this article shall diminish the right of any

employee covered hereunder to present his own grievance, as set forth in Title 26, Sec. 967, MRSA.

From the agreement between:

Decatur, Illinois; Board of Education, custodians

and matrons, and The Service Employees International Union (SEIU)

A R T IC LE II Grievance Procedure

1. When differences arise between the school

board and Local #344, the school board agrees
to meet and bargain with duly accredited

officers of Local #344, together with committees of Local #344 who are employees of the

school board. The union and/or employees

agree not to strike but rather to follow the

procedure outlined in Article II, Section 2 of

this agreement for the settlement of differences.

2. In case of grievances the following procedure

will be followed:

Step 1: Employee shall first take his case up

with the foreman.

Step 2: Failing to reach a satisfactory agreement, the employee shall call and

discuss the grievance with the Chief

Steward or his designated representative. The Chief Steward may designate

an assistant steward for each shift to

handle the grievance in his absence.

Step 3: If the matter is not resolved the Chief

Steward will meet with the Director of

Buildings and Grounds or his designated representative. At this step the

grievance shall be submitted in writing

to the Director of Buildings and

Grounds.

Step 4: Failing to reach a satisfactory agreement, the employee, Director of Buildings and Grounds, Chief Steward, and

Union Business Agent shall meet with

the Superintendent of Schools and his

staff.

Step 5: If the grievant wishes to appeal the

decision of the Superintendent of

Schools, he must request within 5

calendar days of receipt of the decision of the Superintendent of Schools

that the grievance be referred to either

advisory factfinding or to the Board of

Education.

Advisory Factfinding

Upon request of the grievant and the union, the

unresolved grievance will be referred to advisory factfinding. A single factfinder will be used.

If the Board and the union are unable to agree

upon a factfinder within 7 days, a panel of 5 or

7 names will be obtained from the American

Arbitration Association, and starting with the

grievant the parties shall alternately strike

names until a single name is left. If the

individual selected as the factfinder is not

available, other individuals will be contacted in

reverse order of their names having been stricken

from the list.

It will be the responsibility of the factfinder to

review the grievance, investigate the facts of the

situation, study the terms of this agreement,

determine the legitimacy of the grievance, and

recommend to the board of education terms of

settlement in those instances when the grievance is determined as being valid. The factfinder’s report shall be a written report to the

board of education with one copy to the

grievant. The recommendations of the factfinder will be binding upon both parties unless

rejected by the board of education within 20

school days from the postmark of the decision.

The board, and the individual shall share

equally the factfinder’s fee and expenses.

Board Review

If the grievant does not wish to incur the

expenses of a factfinder but wishes to continue

the appeal, he must request, within four school

attendance days of receipt of the decision of

the Superintendent of Schools, a meeting with

the board in personnel session. In addition to

the staff member,- this session may be attended

by a designated representative. The session shall

be held within a 4 week period of receipt of the

request. A decision shall be made within seven

calendar days of the session, and copies of the

written decision shall be sent immediately to

the grievant and the Director of Personnel.
Appendix C. Grievance Form*

From the agreement between:

The Board of Education, Independent School District

No. 535, Rochester, Minn., and the American

Federation o f State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME)

1. Grievant___________________________________________________

2. Position___________________________________________________

Building

Date of Filing

3. Contract provision alleged violated:

4. Time, Date, Place o f Occurrence:

5. Statement of the grievance (include events and conditions of the grievance and persons responsible.)

6. Redress Sought:

Signature of Grievant

♦Copy to Superintendent and to person being grieved.
Appendix C. Grievance Form Level I Response

1. Date issued

2. Response:

Signature of Board Designee

3. Initial Applicable Statements:

I hereby accept the above determination.

I hereby decline the above determination.

I intend to process the grievance to the next stage.

Signature of Grievant Date
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

REGIONAL OFFICES

Region I

1603 JFK Federal Building

Government Center

Boston, Mass. 02203

Phone: 223-6762 (Area Code 617)

Region II

Suite 3400

1515 Broadway

New York, N.Y. 10036

Phone: 971-5405 (Area Code 212)

Region III

P.O. Box 13309

Philadelphia, Pa. 19101

Phone: 597-1154 (Area Code 215)

Region IV

Suite 540

1371 Peachtree St., NE.

Atlanta, Ga. 30309

Phone: 526-5418 (Area Code 404)

Region V

9th Floor, 230 South Dearborn S t

Chicago, III. 60604

Phone: 353-1880 (Area Code 312)

Region VI

1100 Commerce St., Rm. 6B7

Dallas, Tex. 75202

Phone: 749-3516 (Area Code 214)

Regions VII and VIII *

Federal Office Building

911 Walnut St., 15th Floor

Kansas City, Mo. 64106

Phone: 374-2481 (Area Code 816)

Regions IX and X **

450 Golden Gate Ave.

Box 36017

San Francisco, Calif. 94102

Phone: 556-4678 (Area Code 415)

Regions VII and VIII are serviced by Kansas City

Regions IX and X are serviced by San Francisco