Court Opinion

ID: 9667817
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 01:55:36.605346+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:41.054456
License: Public Domain

Spencer, J.,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Where, as here, an individual avails himself of the benefits of a collective bargaining agreement, he may not reject the terms of that agreement. Arnett v. Kennedy (1974), 416 U. S. 134, 94 S. Ct. 1633, 40 L. Ed. 2d 15.
Brady was terminated for sufficient cause: The lack of funds. As stated in Levitt v. Board of Trustees of Nebraska State Colleges, 376 F. Supp. 945: “* * * where lack of funds necessitated releasing a sizeable number of the faculty, certainly it was peculiarly within the province of the school administration to determine which teachers should be released, and which retained.”
Working under the premise that with the limited funds available as complete an academic program as possible should be maintained, Wayne State College made a reasonable decision to terminate Brady, based upon a comparison of his academic preparation with other members of the history department. On the record, I would sustain the judgment of the District Judge. He found the procedure for a hearing set out in the bylaws did not have to be precisely followed so long as procedural due process was provided. He also found that Brady, having utilized the grievance and arbitration procedure, was bound by the decision.
Newton, J., joins in this dissent.