Appeal of State Employees' Ass'n of N.H., Inc., 96-387

• Decision Date: 16 June 1998
• Docket Number: No. 96-387,96-387
• Parties: Appeal of STATE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC. (New Hampshire Public Employee Labor Relations Board).
• Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court

Page 218

714 A.2d 218 Appeal of STATE EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC. (New Hampshire Public Employee Labor Relations Board). No. 96-387. Supreme Court of New Hampshire. June 16, 1998.

Page 219

Michael C. Reynolds, Concord, by brief and orally, for State Employees' Association of New Hampshire, Inc., S.E.I.U., Local 1984.

Philip T. McLaughlin, Attorney General (Douglas N. Jones, Assistant Attorney General, on the brief and orally), for State.

BROCK, Chief Justice.

The State Employees' Association of New Hampshire, Inc., S.E.I.U., Local 1984 (union), appeals a decision of the New Hampshire Public Employee Labor Relations Board (board) dismissing the union's unfair labor practice (ULP) complaints. The complaints alleged that the State's passage of House Bill 32 (HB-32) with the executive branch's support breached a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the State and the union, and that the State's refusal to negotiate employment terms and conditions affected by HB-32 constituted an ULP. We affirm.

We accept the following facts found by the board because competent evidence in the record supports them. See RSA 541:13 (1997); Appeal of Dube, 138 N.H. 155, 158, 636 A.2d 59, 61 (1993). The union, the certified bargaining agent for employees of the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), entered into a CBA with the State for the period July 1, 1995, through June 30, 1997. In October 1995, the union filed an ULP complaint against the State, the Governor, and the commissioner of the DHHS. The union alleged that the State committed an ULP by proposing HB-32 because the bill, if passed, would directly affect wages, benefits, and terms and conditions of employment covered by the CBA. HB-32 provides for "an integrated, administrative structure for the design and delivery of a comprehensive and coordinated system of health and human services." Laws 1995, 310:1. The purpose of HB-32, as originally set forth by the legislature in the bill, was to enable the DHHS "to carry out a restructuring of its organization" and to provide the DHHS "with maximum flexibility and authority to effect the proposed reorganization and to respond quickly" to changes in the State population's needs or budgets, or in federal programs and guidelines. The board dismissed this complaint for lack of ripeness.

On November 1, 1995, HB-32 was passed in a special session. Laws 1995, ch. 310. On November 9, 1995, the State refused the union's demand to re-open negotiations concerning the impact of HB-32 on the terms

Page 220

and...