Connecticut Educ. Ass'n v. State Bd. of Labor Relations, 3288

Decision Date17 September 1985
Docket NumberNo. 3288,3288
Citation5 Conn.App. 253,498 A.2d 102
CourtConnecticut Court of Appeals
Parties, 27 Ed. Law Rep. 1154 CONNECTICUT EDUCATION ASSOCIATION et al. v. STATE BOARD OF LABOR RELATIONS et al.
Ronald Cordilico, Hartford, with whom, on the brief, were William J. Dolan, Constance Augsburger, Hartford, and Kimberly A. Knox, law student intern, for named plaintiff

James C. Ferguson, Hartford, for plaintiff Connecticut State Federation of Teachers.

J. Larry Foy, Wethersfield, for named defendant.

Joel M. Ellis, Hartford, with whom, on the brief, was William S. Zeman, West Hartford, for defendant Connecticut State Council of AFSA Locals, AFL-CIO.

Joseph I. Lieberman, Atty. Gen., and Robert W. Garvey and Thomas P. Clifford III, Asst. Attys. Gen., filed a brief as amici curiae.

Before DUPONT, C.P.J., and HULL and DALY, JJ.

HULL, Judge.

This case, which concerns the vital question of the right of displaced administrator unit personnel to bump 1 teacher unit personnel, was reserved on a stipulation under Practice Book §§ 3133 and 3134 for the advice of the Supreme Court by the trial court, Edelberg, J., and was transferred to this court on June 11, 1984. See Practice Book § 3076.

The stipulation provides: "1. The facts upon which the questions arise are as follows:

"a. On July 16, 1982, the Connecticut State Council of AFSA Locals, AFL-CIO (hereinafter AFSA) filed with the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations (hereinafter Labor Board) a petition for declaratory ruling pursuant to Section 4-176 of the Connecticut General Statutes raising certain questions under Section 10-153b-153c of the Connecticut General Statutes (hereinafter the Negotiations Act) and Section 10-151 of the Connecticut General Statutes (hereinafter the Tenure Act). AFSA's petition requested a declaratory ruling responsive to the questions set forth in subparagraph g, below.

"b. On August 15, 1983, the Labor Board issued a Decision and Declaratory Ruling (hereinafter Ruling) in response to said Petition filed by AFSA (see attached).

"c. On September 12, 1983, the Connecticut Education Association, a party to said proceeding before the Labor Board filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment in the Superior Court for Hartford-New Britain at Hartford seeking a determination of the validity of the Labor Board's said Ruling.

"d. AFSA made an application to be made a party defendant on October 26, 1983, which application was granted on November 7, 1983.

"e. The Connecticut State Federation of Teachers [CSFT] made a Motion to Intervene as a party plaintiff on October 26, 1983, which Motion was granted on November 28, 1983.

"f. All the pleadings have been closed.

"g. The questions referred to in subparagraph a, above, and which were set forth in said AFSA petition are presented below.

(a) Whether under the Act Concerning School Board-Teacher Negotiations and the Teacher Tenure Act, it is a mandatory subject of bargaining for the administrators' unit and/or the teachers' unit that members of an administrators' unit whose positions have been eliminated or whose positions have been lost to other administrators, may bump into or be assigned to a position in the teachers' unit, which position (i) is held by a Tenured teacher, (ii) is held by a non-Tenured teacher pursuant to C.G.S. Sec. 10-151(b) or (iii) is unoccupied?

(b) If such a provision were to be negotiated between an administrators' unit and a school board providing for such bumping or (c) If such a provision were to be negotiated between an administrators' unit and a school board providing for such bumping or assignment would it be enforceable if there was an existing provision in the collective bargaining agreement of the teachers' unit prohibiting members of the administrators' unit from bumping members of the teachers' unit or from being assigned to unoccupied positions in the teachers' unit?

assignment would it be enforceable notwithstanding a lack of agreement by the teachers' unit with such provision?

(d) Whether under the Act Concerning School Board-Teacher Negotiations and the Teacher Tenure Act, it is a mandatory subject of bargaining for the administrators' unit and/or the teachers' unit that members of the administrators' unit whose positions have been eliminated or who have lost their positions to other administrators, may not bump into positions held by members in the teachers' unit or be assigned to unoccupied positions in the teachers' unit?

(e) If such a provision is negotiated between a teachers' unit and a school board prohibiting such bumping or assignment, is said provision enforceable notwithstanding lack of agreement by the administrators' unit to such provision?

(f) If such a provision were to be negotiated between a teachers' unit and a school board prohibiting such bumping or assignment, could it be enforceable if there was an existing provision in the collective bargaining agreement of the administrators' unit permitting its members to bump members of the teachers' unit or permitting members of the administrators' unit to be assigned to unoccupied positions in the teachers' unit?

"h. The Labor Board's ruling on each of the above questions is set forth in paragraphs a. (i), a. (ii), a. (iii), b., c., d., e. and f. of the Order contained in its said Ruling. [See pp. 258-60, infra.]

"2. The questions upon which advice is sought are the same as those set forth in paragraph 1g, above, and they are incorporated herein by reference.

"3. The answers to the questions set forth in paragraph 1g, above, will determine, or are reasonably certain to enter into a determination of, the case.

"4. The present determination of the questions will be in the interest of simplicity, directness and economy in judicial action because,

"a. The plaintiffs, both state-wide public school labor organizations, represent in excess of 30,000 public school teachers in Connecticut. The questions raised herein most probably will arise again and again in the Superior Court as teachers are 'bumped' by administrators whose positions are being eliminated. This potentially voluminous litigation will take place in the form of appeals under C.G.S. Section 10-151 (also known as the 'Teacher Fair Dismissal Law') pending a decision by the Supreme Court.

"b. As school closings occur, administrators will lose their positions and the question of whether they have the right to bump teachers will become increasingly important.

"c. There are many collective bargaining agreements across Connecticut between school boards and administrator units and teacher units containing reduction-in-force clauses which will be affected by judicial determination, thus making a present decision by the Supreme Court necessary.

"d. The issues raised in the Complaint involve matters of substantial public interest and in which delay may work a substantial injustice."

The ruling referred to in the stipulation contains the following order: "By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the Connecticut State Board of Labor Relations by the Act Concerning School Board-Teacher Negotiations and by Section 4-176 of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 10-152e-26 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, it is hereby ORDERED "a.(i) A collective bargaining agreement between a school board and the bargaining representative for a teacher unit which contains a layoff procedure giving tenured members of the teacher unit rights to bump other tenured members of the teacher unit, must give tenured displaced administrator unit members bumping rights which are equal to the bumping rights given to tenured teacher unit members in that no criteria for determining layoff which disadvantages displaced administrators solely because of their service as administrators may be applied to them. Subject to this equal treatment restriction, the subject of tenured administrator unit members bumping tenured members of the teacher unit is a mandatory subject of bargaining for the exclusive representative of the teacher unit.

and DECLARED that the questions presented in this Petition for Declaratory Ruling are answered as follows:

"The subject of tenured displaced administrator unit members bumping tenured members of the teacher unit is an illegal subject of bargaining for the bargaining representative of the administrator unit.

"a.(ii) A collective bargaining agreement between a school board and the bargaining representative for a teacher unit which contains a layoff procedure giving non-tenured members of the teacher unit rights to bump other non-tenured members of the teacher unit, must give non-tenured displaced administrator unit members bumping rights which are equal to the bumping rights given to non-tenured teacher unit members in that no criteria for determining layoff which disadvantages displaced administrators solely because of their service as administrators may be applied to them. Subject to this equal treatment restriction, the subject of non-tenured displaced administrator unit members bumping tenured members of the teacher unit is a mandatory subject of bargaining for the bargaining representative of the teacher unit.

"The subject of non-tenured displaced administrator unit members bumping non-tenured members of the teacher unit is an illegal subject of bargaining for the bargaining representative of the administrator unit.

"A tenured displaced administrator unit member must be permitted to bump a non-tenured member of the teacher unit if the tenured displaced administrator is qualified for the position held by the non-tenured member of the teacher unit. Any restriction placed on this right which is contained in a collective bargaining agreement involves an illegal subject of bargaining.

"a.(iii) A displaced member of the administrator unit must be assigned to an unoccupied position in the teacher unit if the displaced administrator is qualified for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Honulik v. Town of Greenwich
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 13 Octubre 2009
    ... ... No. 18046 ... Supreme Court of Connecticut ... Argued April 15, 2008 ... Decided ... sought to arbitrate the matter before the state board of mediation and arbitration (board), but ... it nullifies or broadens express provision; labor law arbitrators ... 293 Conn. 715 ... refuse ... See Stratford v. International Assn. of Firefighters, AFL-CIO, Local 998, 248 Conn ... v. National Labor Relations Board, 243 F.3d 87, 92 (1st Cir.2001); see also ... ...
  • Labbe v. Hartford Pension Com'n
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 20 Agosto 1996
    ... ... No. 15275 ... Supreme Court of Connecticut ... Argued March 19, 1996 ... Decided Aug ... The trial court, Hon. Robert J. Hale, state trial referee, dismissed the action on the ground ... Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., Local Union No. 6, 493 U.S. 67, 87, 110 S.Ct ... v. State Board of Labor Relations, 5 Conn. [239 Conn. 195] App. 253, ... ...
  • Honulik v. Town of Greenwich
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 24 Febrero 2009
    ... ... No. 18046 ... Supreme Court of Connecticut ... Argued April 15, 2008 ... Decided ... sought to arbitrate the matter before the state board of mediation and arbitration, but the board ... distinctions are critical in the context of labor law and, accordingly, to our resolution of the ... West Hartford Education Assn., Inc. v. DeCourcy, 162 Conn. 566, 578-79, ... on interpretations by National Labor Relations Board because Connecticut statutes dealing with ... ...
  • Cimochowski v. Hartford Public Schools, (SC 16578).
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 13 Agosto 2002
    ... ... (SC 16578) ... Supreme Court of Connecticut ... Argued April 16, 2002 ... Officially ... requiring a certificate issued by the State Board of Education, a `teacher,' as that term is ... administrators." See Connecticut Education Assn. v. State Board of Labor Relations, 5 Conn ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT