Collaborative for Education Services, Inc. v. Seiu Local 509, 021418 MACA, 17-P-392
|Party Name:||COLLABORATIVE FOR EDUCATION SERVICES, INC. v. SEIU LOCAL 509|
|Judge Panel:||Kinder, Desmond & Sacks, JJ.|
|Case Date:||February 14, 2018|
|Court:||Appeals Court of Massachusetts|
Summary decisions issued by the Appeals Court pursuant to its rule 1:28, as amended by 73 Mass.App.Ct. 1001 (2009), are primarily directed to the parties and, therefore, may not fully address the facts of the case or the panel's decisional rationale. Moreover, such decisions are not circulated to the entire court and, therefore, represent only the views of the panel that decided the case. A summary decision pursuant to rule 1:28 issued after February 25, 2008, may be cited for its persuasive value but, because of the limitations noted above, not as binding precedent. See Chace v. Curran, 71 Mass.App.Ct. 258, 260 n.4 (2008).
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 1:28
After an arbitrator decided that a dispute between these two parties was subject to arbitration under their collective bargaining agreement (CBA), Collaborative for Education Services, Inc. (Collaborative) filed a complaint in Superior Court, and moved "to vacate arbitrator's award, to stay arbitration and for declaratory judgment." SEIU Local 509 (union) filed a cross motion to confirm the arbitrator's decision. A Superior Court judge allowed the union's motion and denied Collaborative's motion, and entered judgment accordingly, from which Collaborative now appeals. We affirm.
At issue before us is an interpretation of the CBA and how it relates to conditional employees. The CBA states that an employee must work a "conditional employment period of three consecutive years, " during which the "employee may be discharged, laid off, suspended or demoted without recourse by the employee or the Union under the grievance or arbitration procedures established by this Agreement" (conditional employment provision). The CBA further contains a nondiscrimination provision, which states that neither party will "discriminate against any employee in violation of any law on the basis of . . . union activity." Finally, the CBA lays out a grievance procedure that provides that if either party disputes the application or interpretation of the CBA and the parties cannot...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP