Opinion ID: 2369970
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Entirety of CMPA Text; Structure of Review

Text: The statutory provisions outlined above in Part I.B. reflect the comprehensive purpose just outlined, including significant employee rights not only in the disciplinary process but also in the grievance system. Moreover, CMPA provides for a comprehensive system of administrative review of employer actionswhether under CMPA itself through OEA or under a union contract subject to PERBand in each case subject to judicial review in Superior Court. See supra Part I.B. The legislative history does not reflect whether, in enacting CMPA, the Council intended to foreclose tort remedies. The Committee Report, however, did stress a role for the courts, but only a limited role: judicial review of administrative decisions. See COMMITTEE REPORT at 42. The Committee Report called significant the creation of [a]n Office of Employee Appeals, which is an independent personnel appeals authority which will hear all personnel-related employee appeals. COMMITTEE REPORT at 43 (emphasis added). While this language does not say the OEA channel is exclusive (in part because the Council was careful not to foreclose the District and its unions from bargaining for creation of alternative review procedures), it appears the Committee Report was not contemplating the possibility of still other remedies. It would seem, therefore, from the purpose and text of CMPA, including its judicial review provisions, that the Council plainly intended [23] CMPA to create a mechanism for addressing virtually every conceivable personnel issue among the District, its employees, and their unionswith a reviewing role for the courts as a last resort, not a supplementary role for the courts as an alternative forum.