Rockland Professional Fire Fighters Ass'n v. City of Rockland

Decision Date02 February 1970
Citation261 A.2d 418
Parties73 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2463 ROCKLAND PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION v. CITY OF ROCKLAND, Maine.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

Theodore H. Kurtz, Portland, John L. Knight, Rockland, for plaintiff.

A. Alan Grossman, and Barry M. Faber, Rockland, for defendant.

Before WILLIAMSON, C. J., and MARDEN, DUFRESNE, WEATHERBEE and POMEROY, JJ.

WEATHERBEE, Justice.

In 1957 our Legislature enacted 'An Act Relating to Arbitration Pursuant to Collective Bargaining Contracts'. This legislation as amended is now 26 M.R.S.A. § 951, et seq. Section 951 reads:

'A written provision in any collective bargaining contract to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or out of the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, or such refusal, herein designated in this subchapter as 'a written submission agreement,' shall be valid, irrevocable and enforceable, save upon such grounds, independent of the provisions for arbitration, as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.'

Section 954 provides for the appointment of arbitrators by the Court in the event that the collective bargaining contract fails to establish a method for their appointment or if the method so provided is ignored by one party. Section 956 details methods for obtaining testimony of witnesses at the arbitration hearing, and for the fees of witnesses. Section 957 provides for the enforcement by the Superior Court of the award of arbitration upon application of a party that judgment shall be entered for the party. Section 958 enumerates grounds which would justify vacating an award.

In 1965 the Legislature enacted a statute which is referred to as the Fire Fighters Arbitration Law which is now 26 M.R.S.A. § 980, et seq. In doing so the Legislature declared it to be the public policy of the State that this particular class of municipal employees in their position of high responsibility should be given the right to organize and bargain collectively with the municipalities in arriving at a contract of employment.

Section 981 reads:

'The protection of the public health, safety and welfare demands that the permanent uniformed members of any paid fire department in any municipality not be accorded the right to strike or engage in any work stoppage or slowdown. This necessary prohibition does not, however, require the denial to such municipal employees of other recognized rights of labor such as the right to organize, to be represented by a labor organization of their choice, and the right to bargain collectively concerning wages, rates of pay and other terms and conditions of employment.'

Following the broad statement of policy of section 981 the Fire Fighters Arbitration Law proceeds to empower the fire fighters to compel the municipality to meet with the fire fighters' bargaining agent to bargain collectively in the formation of a written contract of employment. Section 986 provides that if the parties cannot reach a contract the unresolved issues shall be submitted to arbitration at the option of the association. Section 987 sets out the method of selecting the arbitrators. Section 988 describes the rules under which hearings shall be conducted and specifies that a less-than-unanimous decision of the arbitrators shall not be binding on either party.

Section 991 includes the words

'Any collective bargaining agreement negotiated under this chapter shall specifically provide that the fire fighters who are subject to its terms shall have no right to engage in any work stoppage, slowdown or strike, the consideration for such provision being the right to a resolution of disputed questions.'

It was thus the legislative intention to continue to deny the permanent uniformed members of municipal fire departments the weapons of strikes, slowdowns and work stoppages but to avoid the abrasive and disruptive effects of unresolved labor grievances by enabling the organizations to enter into labor contracts which assured them the other rights of labor including the right of arbitration guaranteed by section 951 of the general arbitration law.

The plain language of these sections and the statement of factors to be considered by the Arbitration Board leaves us with no doubt that the only issue expressly authorized for submission for arbitration under the Fire Fighters Arbitration Law was that of the formation of a contract. It will be noted that the law contains no specific provision for arbitration of grievances arising under the contract, which the Defendant argues demonstrates the legislature's intention not to give the fire fighters any right to arbitrate such grievances.

Under the authority of the Fire Fighters Arbitration Law the firemen of Rockland organized and entered into a contract of employment for the calendar year of 1967. In this contract the Defendant recognized the Plaintiff as the firemen's exclusive bargaining agent and various provisions as to wages, hours and working conditions were agreed upon. It is of particular interest to us here that a meticulous process for settling grievances was established by the contract consisting of four steps, the third of which provided for a hearing before an Appeal Grievance Board. The provisions establishing Step 4 read:

'In the event that the decision of the appeal Grievance Board is not satisfactory to the Grievance Committee and is not resolved within ten days after its decision, all unresolved issues shall be submitted to arbitration at the option of the Association.'

The contract then provided that:

'Arbitration shall be in accordance with Title 26, Sect. 987 of the Maine Revised Statutes Annotated.'

As we noted before, however, section 987 only sets up machinery for the organization and operation of an arbitration board for the purpose of resolving disputes concerning the negotiation of a labor contract and makes no provision for arbitration of disputes arising later under the contract.

On April 27, 1967 Walter R. Dyer, a Rockland fireman, was suspended for six days allegedly for insubordinate conduct. Dyer and the Plaintiff exhausted the grievance processes provided in the contract and the matter went on to arbitration. The parties followed the provisions of section 987 in selecting the members of the arbitration board...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • City of Biddeford by Board of Ed. v. Biddeford Teachers Ass'n
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • April 30, 1973
    ...Chap. 424, § 2. This Court was called upon to interpret the arbitration features of the law in Rockland Professional Fire Fighters Ass'n v. City of Rockland, Me., 261 A.2d 418 (1970) but the issue of its constitutionality was not raised.21 Wellington & Winter, Structuring Collective Bargain......
  • Pontiac Police Officers Ass'n v. City of Pontiac
    • United States
    • Michigan Supreme Court
    • June 1, 1975
    ...to Arbitrate Major and Minor Disputes in Public Employment, 54 Cornell L.Rev. 129 (1968).19 See also Rockland Professional Fire Fighters Association v. Rockland, 261 A.2d 418 (Me., 1970); Providence Teachers Union v. School Committee of Providence, 108 R.I. 444, 276 A.2d 762 (1971); Danvill......
  • Grosse Pointe Farms Police Officers Ass'n v. Howlett
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • May 1, 1974
    ...that the purpose is to assure the right to include arbitration provisions in labor contracts. Rockland Professional Fire Fighters Assn. v. City of Rockland, 261 A.2d 418, 419 (Me.1970); Providence Teachers Union, Local 958, American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO v. School Committee of the......
  • Salary Policy Employee Panel v. Tennessee Valley Auth.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • July 18, 1984
    ...are applying principles developed in the private sector to public employee labor disputes. In Rockland Professional Fire Fighters Association v. City of Rockland, 261 A.2d 418 (Me.1970), the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine construed an arbitration statute governing employee-employer relatio......
  • 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