Chippewa Val. Schools v. Hill

Decision Date11 June 1975
Docket NumberNo. 2,Docket No. 20494,2
Citation62 Mich.App. 116,233 N.W.2d 208
Parties, 90 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2976 CHIPPEWA VALLEY SCHOOLS, a Michigan school district, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Toni HILL and Chippewa Valley Education Association, a Michigan employee organization, Defendants-Appellees
CourtCourt of Appeal of Michigan — District of US

Dank, Peterson & Hay, by Robert P. Dank, Mt. Clemens, for plaintiff-appellant.

Robert J. Finkel, Detroit, for defendants-appellees.

Before R. B. BURNS, P.J., and KELLY and O'HARA, * JJ.

KELLY, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of the circuit court affirming the award of an arbitrator. We affirm.

Plaintiff is a Michigan school district in Macomb County. Defendant Chippewa Valley Education Association is a Michigan labor organization representing school teachers employed by the plaintiff school district, and defendant Toni Hill is a female school teacher within the district.

In 1972, the parties entered into a written collective bargaining agreement covering the terms and conditions of teachers employed in the Chippewa Valley School District for the 1972--74 school years. Article XXIII of that agreement, entitled 'Professional Grievance Procedure' contains a five-step procedure for resolution of any 'claim by a teacher or the Association that there has been a violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of any provision of this Agreement, or any rule, order, or regulation of the Board'. The culminating step in the procedure provides for the selection of an independent arbitrator to decide the controversy in question.

In March, 1973, defendant Toni Hill advised the Board of Education that she was pregnant and requested a maternity leave of absence for the next school year beginning in September, 1973. She provided the board with a statement from her physician indicating that she would be able to perform her duties for the remainder of the 1972--73 school year (which was to conclude June 14, 1973). On March 27, 1973, the board granted a maternity leave consistent with Article XII of the collective bargaining agreement.

On June 7, 1973, Mrs. Hill delivered her child and thus absented herself from her teaching duties for the remaining week of the school year. On June 13, 1973, the board advised Mrs. Hill that her maternity leave of absence was being made effective as of the actual date of delivery (June 7, 1973), rather than as of the beginning of the next school year.

On July 12, 1973, the defendants filed a grievance pursuant to Article XXIII of the collective bargaining agreement, contending that Mrs. Hill was entitled to draw upon her accumulated sick leave in order to be paid for the period between June 7 and June 14, 1973. After all of the steps in the grievance procedure were exhausted, the issue proceeded to binding arbitration before Arbitrator James R. McCormick, who was mutually selected by the parties. Proceedings on the grievance were held by Arbitrator McCormick on October 15, 1973. The parties were all represented by counsel and fully participated in the proceedings.

On January 9, 1974, Arbitrator McCormick issued a 13-page opinion and award sustaining the grievance of Mrs. Hill and the association and directing the board 'to permit the Grievant to use accumulated sick leave days under Article XI of the Collective Bargaining Agreement for the period June 7 through 14, 1973'.

Plaintiff filed for vacation of the award pursuant to GCR 1963, 769.9(1)(c); the defendants filed for confirmation pursuant to GCR 1963, 769.8. After a hearing on both motions, the circuit court entered an order confirming the award of the arbitrator.

Plaintiff alleges that the circuit court erred in refusing to vacate the award pursuant to its motion made under GCR 1963, 769.9(1)(c) in which it claimed the arbitrator exceeded his power.

The arbitrator derives his power from the agreement between the parties, and the agreement is the law of the case. Acme Cut Stone Co. v. New Center Development Corp., 281 Mich. 32, 274 N.W. 700 (1937), Stowe v. Mutual Home Builders Corp., 252 Mich. 492, 497, 233 N.W. 391, 392 (1930), McCandliss v. Ward W. Ross, Inc., 45 Mich.App. 342, 206 N.W.2d 455 (1973), Lv. den., 389 Mich. 795 (1973).

Article XI of the collective bargaining agreement, entitled 'Illness or disability and leaves of absence', deals with the issue of sick leave. However, there is no indication in Article XI as to whether sick leave may be used to cover absence from work caused by pregnancy or child birth. Article XXIII provides that the arbitrator shall have no power to alter or add to the terms of the agreement, but the issue which the arbitrator was called upon to decide in this case is clearly an issue within the subject matter of Article XI. Furthermore, Article XXIII states that both parties agree to be bound by the award of the arbitrator.

Arbitration is looked upon with favor by the courts and it is the policy of the courts to construe liberally arbitration clauses and to resolve any doubts in favor of arbitration. Stadel v. Granger Brothers Inc., 4 Mich.App. 250, 144 N.W.2d 609 (1966), McCandliss v. Ward W. Ross, Inc., supra.

We find that the issue of sick leave is part of the subject matter of the collective bargaining agreement between the parties, and the arbitrator did not exceed his powers by rendering a decision on the issue of sick leave in the instant case. Our Supreme Court recently noted in Kaleva-Norman-Dickson School District No. 6 v Kaleva-Norman-Dickson School Teachers' Association, 393 Mich. 583, 592, 227 N.W.2d 500, 504 (1975):

'Absent an 'express provision excluding (a) particular grievance from arbitration' or the 'most forceful evidence of a purpose to exclude the claim', the matter should go to arbitration.' (Emphasis in the original.)

Doubts should be resolved in favor...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Rembert v. RYAN'S STEAK HOUSES, INC., Docket No. 196542.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • April 9, 1999
    ...be ascertained by the usual rules of interpretation and given effect." Id. at 581, 255 N.W.2d 347. In Chippewa Valley Schools v. Hill, 62 Mich.App. 116, 120, 233 N.W.2d 208 (1975), involving a public employee's right to pregnancy leave, the Court declared: "Doubts should be resolved in favo......
  • Heurtebise v. Reliable Business Computers
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • July 16, 1996
    ...arbitration clauses are to be liberally construed with any doubts to be resolved in favor of arbitration. Chippewa Valley Schools v. Hill, 62 Mich.App. 116, 233 N.W.2d 208 (1975). Contrary to plaintiff's suggestion, arbitration of plaintiff's claims will not result in the loss of her rights......
  • Amtower v. William C. Roney & Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • October 16, 1998
    ...arbitration clauses are to be liberally construed with any doubts to be resolved in favor of arbitration. Chippewa Valley Schools v. Hill, 62 Mich.App. 116, 120, 233 N.W.2d 208 (1975).6 Although the general principles to be applied in construing arbitration agreements originated in the labo......
  • Clinton Tp. v. Contrera
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • September 5, 1979
    ...144 N.W.2d 609 (1966), resolving any doubts about the arbitrability of an issue in favor of arbitration. Chippewa Valley Schools v. Hill, 62 Mich.App. 116, 233 N.W.2d 208 (1975), Lv. den., 395 Mich. 806 (1975). If the arbitration clause arguably includes the asserted dispute, then arbitrati......
  • 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