International Ass'n of Firefighters Local No. 2287, Montpelier v. City of Montpelier, AFL-CIO
| Decision Date | 04 February 1975 |
| Docket Number | 146-74,AFL-CIO,Nos. 30-74,s. 30-74 |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
| Parties | , 88 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3235, 76 Lab.Cas. P 53,616 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL #2287, MONTPELIER, Vermont v. CITY OF MONTPELIER, Vermont. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES,v. CITY OF MONTPELIER, Vermont. |
Cornelius O. Granai, Barre, for Intern Ass'n of Firefighters.
Edward J. Carroll of Thomas & Alexander, Bulington, for American Federation of State, County and Mun. Employees.
McKee, Clewley & FitzPatrick, Montpelier, for defendant.
Before BARNEY, C. J., and SMITH, KEYSER, DALEY and LARROW, JJ.
In two appeals, argued together by agreement, the appellant City of Montpelier claims error by the State Labor Relations Board in its certification, after appropriate elections, of the respective plaintiffs as exclusive collectible bargaining units. By its order of May 1, 1974, the Board, acting under 21 V.S.A. § 1724, certified the International Association of Firefighters, Local No. 2287, (hereinafter called Firefighters) as the bargaining agent of the Assistant Chiefs, Captains and Firefighters of the Montpelier Fire Department, and on the same date, by similar order, certified American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, (AFSCME) as the bargaining unit of the permanent patrolmen and dispatchers of the Montpelier Police Department. The firefighters' unit includes 15 employees, the police unit six. These orders are appealed by the City on a common ground, raised below in each case. No question is here presented as to the membership in each unit, but, as it did below, the City urges that certification of the two units creates an overfragmentation of units, in violation of one of the criteria set out in 21 V.S.A. § 1724(c)(2).
The statute here involved, 21 V.S.A. § 1724(c) reads in its material portion as follows:
(c) In determining whether a question of representation exists, the board shall take into consideration the following criteria: . . ..
(2) Whether overfragmentation of units will result from certification to a degree which is likely to produce an adverse effect on the effective representation of other employees of the muncipal employer or upon the effective operation of the municipal employer.
In the AFSCME case, the Board found that there was no evidence from which it could conclude that designation of the bargaining unit would produce an adverse effect upon the effective operation of the City, the only point here in controversy. In the Firefighters' case, it made an affirmative finding that such designation would not create an overfragmentation likely to produce such adverse effect. The City here argues that these findings cannot be sustained. We disagree.
Appellees contend that overfragmentation, under the statute, is an affirmative defense, with the burden of proof resting on the City under V.R.C.P. 8(c). V.R.C.P. 1 outlines the scope of the Rules of Civil Procedure, and administrative hearings are not included within their purview. Nor does 3 V.S.A. § 810(1), making the rules of evidence in county courts applicable to such hearings, affect this contention, since assignment of burden of proof is not a rule of evidence. Further, we are not persuaded that the designation of statutory criteria to be met, without more, results in the assignment of a burden of proof to any party involved. Our affirmance of the results below must be no other grounds. Such other grounds are clearly present.
While the verbatim record of the hearings below is fragmentary and incomplete, it is in effect conceded that the City's position is based upon evidence given by its city manager and corroborated to some extent by one of its aldermen. Admitting that the police and fire departments have different functions ans work...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Quaker Oats Co. v. Cedar Rapids Human Rights Commission
... ... Atty. Gen. and David F. McGuire, City Atty., Cedar Rapids, for appellant ... That section provides: ... "Local laws may implement this chapter. Nothing ... 706, 224 S.E.2d 820 (1976); International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 2287, Montpelier v ... ...
-
Sondergeld v. Town of Hubbardton, 87-267
... ... See Re Montpelier & Barre R.R., 135 Vt. 102, 105, 369 A.2d 1379, ... § 4467. Rutland Country Club, Inc. v. City of Rutland, 140 Vt. 142, 146, 436 A.2d 730, 732 ... , 570, 367 A.2d 665, 666 (1976); International Ass'n of Firefighters Local # 2287 v. City of ... ...
-
State Dept. of Taxes v. Tri-State Indus. Laundries, Inc., TRI-STATE
...contrary. In re Young, 134 Vt. 569, 570-71, 367 A.2d 665, 666 (1976) (per curiam); International Association of Firefighters Local # 2287 v. City of Montpelier, 133 Vt. 175, 178, 332 A.2d 795, 797 (1975); K. Davis, Administrative Law Text § 11.06 (3d ed. 1972). Therefore, judicial review of......
-
Agency of Administration, State Bldgs. Division, In re
...415 A.2d 216, 218 (1980); In re Young, 134 Vt. 569, 570, 367 A.2d 665, 666 (1976); International Association of Firefighters Local # 2287 v. City of Montpelier, 133 Vt. 175, 178, 332 A.2d 795, 797 (1975), and we have no wish to repudiate that position here. Where warranted by the evidence, ......