Board of Selectmen of Marion v. Labor Relations Commission
Decision Date | 09 April 1979 |
Citation | 388 N.E.2d 302,7 Mass.App.Ct. 360 |
Parties | , 101 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2177 BOARD OF SELECTMEN OF MARION v. LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION. |
Court | Appeals Court of Massachusetts |
William H. Carey, New Bedford, for plaintiffs.
David F. Grunebaum, Sudbury, for defendant.
Before BROWN, GREANEY and KASS, JJ.
Because it insisted on conducting collective bargaining sessions in meetings open to the public, the board of selectmen of the town of Marion (selectmen) was charged with refusing to bargain collectively in good faith 1 by the Massachusetts Labor Relations Commission (commission). From this decision of the commission, the selectmen appealed to the Superior Court under G.L. c. 30A, § 14. The court correctly affirmed the decision of the commission.
1. While the open meeting law contained in G.L. c. 39, §§ 23A-23C, "manifests in § 23B a general policy that all meetings of a governmental body should be open to the public," Attorney General v. School Comm. of Taunton, --- Mass.App. ---, --- A, 386 N.E.2d 1295 (1979), it is permissible to conduct collective bargaining in executive session. G.L. c. 39, § 23B. See Ghiglione v. School Comm. of Southbridge, --- Mass. ---, --- B, 378 N.E.2d 984 (1978).
2. This leaves the question whether declining to draw a shade on the sunshine law constitutes a refusal "to bargain collectively in good faith with the exclusive representative as required in section six (of G.L. c. 150E)." G.L. c. 150E, § 10(A )(5), St.1974, c. 589, § 2. In reviewing the action of an administrative agency we bear in mind our duty to "give due weight to the experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge of the agency." G.L. c. 30A, § 14, St.1976, c. 411.
Since the policy of the open meeting law is to conduct public business in the open, the selectmen suggest that going behind closed doors, even though permissible, derogates from the policy of the statute. Supporting a policy of open covenants openly arrived at, the selectmen say, cannot be tantamount to an unfair labor practice.
Yet the very fact that an exception for collective bargaining appears in the statute evidences a legislative judgment that there is something to be said for closed door labor negotiations. Indeed, when it considered the question in the context of an open meeting statute that did not provide a collective bargaining exception, the New Hampshire Supreme Court observed that there was considerable support for the proposition that "the delicate mechanisms of collective bargaining would be thrown awry if viewed prematurely by the public." Talbot v. Concord Union School Dist., 114 N.H. 532, 535, 323 A.2d 912, 913 (1974). The court in Talbot also noted the position of several State labor boards that bargaining in public would tend to prolong negotiations and damage the procedure of compromise inherent in collective bargaining. Ibid. 2 See Bassett v. Braddock, 262 So.2d 425 (Fla.1972). The reason underlying this conclusion is that the presence of press and public induces rigidity and posturing by the negotiating teams and provokes in them anxiety that compromise will look like retreat. Commentators share this view. 1 Werne, The Law and Practice of Public Employment Labor Relations § 15.3, at 266-267 (1974). Wickham, Tennessee's Sunshine Law: A Need For A Limited Shade And Clearer Focus, 42 Tenn.L.Rev. 557, 564 (1975). 1975 Committee Report of the Labor Relations Law Section of the American Bar Association, Part I at 274.
Thus supported by...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Agric. Labor Relations Bd.
...courts— State ex rel. Bd. of Pub. Utilities v. Crow (Mo.Ct.App. 1979) 592 S.W.2d 285, 289–290, Board of Selectmen v. Labor Relations Com'n (1979) 7 Mass.App.Ct. 360 [388 N.E.2d 302, 303], County of Saratoga v. Newman (1984) 476 N.Y.S.2d 1020 [124 Misc.2d 626, 629] ; and (3) a wide consensus......
-
Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Agric. Labor Relations Bd.
...courts—State ex rel. Bd. of Pub. Utilities v. Crow (Mo.Ct.App. 1979) 592 S.W.2d 285, 289-290, Board of Selectmen v. Labor Relations Com'n (1979) 7 Mass.App.Ct. 360 [388 N.E.2d 302, 303], County of Saratoga v. Newman (1984) 476 N.Y.S.2d 1020 [124 Misc.2d 626, 629]; and (3) a wide consensus a......
-
Carroll County Educ. Ass'n, Inc. v. Board of Educ. of Carroll County
...negotiations. See, e.g., Talbot v. Concord Union School District, 114 N.H. 532, 323 A.2d 912 (1974); Board of Selectmen v. Labor Relations Com'n, 7 Mass.App. 360, 388 N.E.2d 302 (1979); State ex rel. Bd. of Pub. Utilities v. Crow, 592 S.W.2d 285 (Mo.App.1979). The Association maintains that......
-
Town of Burlington v. Labor Relations Commission
...test we consider the "experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge of the agency." Selectmen of Marion v. Labor Relations Commn., 7 Mass.App. 360, 361, 388 N.E.2d 302 (1979). See also as to the scope of review, Labor Relations Commn. v. University Hosp., Inc., 359 Mass. 516, ......