Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Any Other Matters_10/13/2011 CARSQN & A►DHINS ]AMES C. ADKIIVS (1915-1944) L Z930 VJELLINGTOI3 CIRCLE , LEONARD A. CARSON SUl'['E 201 JOHN $. GRIFFIN TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32309 JOHfI D. SAWICKI (856) 894-1004 LUCILLE E. TIJRNER FACSA�ILE (650) 844-1677 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Couzzo, Village nager Village of Tequesta � FROM: Lucille E. Turner : DATE: October 13, 2011 RE: Palm Beach Conntv PBA v. Village of Teqaesta PERC Case CA-2011-Q76 This is to update you on the status of the above-referenced unfair labor practice claim filed by the Police Benevolent Association against the Village. Factual Background Tlie Village terminated the employment of Sergeant Zed Albrecht on December 22, 20i0. This occurred because he violated the Village's Drug Free Policy by refusing to be test� for alcohol three separate times. In addition, lus actions were a violation of an agreement he had signed with the Vii�age in 2005 that had allowed him to return to work after he tested positive for alcohol at work at that time. The PBA filed a grievance of Albrecht's ternzination. The Village advised Albrecht and the PBA that the grievance was not valid because Albrecht had waived his right to file a grievance. Specifically, as part of the 2005 agreernent that allowed him to return to work, Albrecht waived his right to file a grievance if he was later clismissed based on violation of the Village's Drug Free Policy. PBA's Unfair Labor Practice Charge The PBA filed an unfair labor pra.ctice charge (iTLP), alleging that the Village improperly refused to process a valid grievance. The matter is before the State of Florida Public Employee's Reiations Commission (PERC). A heari.ng on the matter was held on July 25, 2011. Hearin� Officer's Recommended Order On September 22, 2011, the PERC hearing officer issued a recommended order finding in favor of the Village. He found that: �llf f Y1A/1R.�Gr" 14o rn • The charge shonld be dismissed because the Village established tha.t Albrecht had waived his right to file a grievance in this situation; and, • The PBA shouid be reqnired to pay the Village's �ttorney's fees and costs because the ULP charge was frivolous. Status of Case The recommendation of the hearing officer is very favorable to the Village. However, it is not the final resoiution of the case. The process going forward is as follows: • Exceptions to Hearing Officer's Recommended Order — The PBA has the right to file exceptions to the HORO. These are due to be filed with PERC on October 14, 2011. We expect PBA will argue that the hearing officer is wrong on the law, and that the Commission should not accept his recommendations. • Response to Exceptions — The Village will then have the right to file a response to the PBA's exceptions. Thase will be due on October 24, 2011. • Final Order from PERC — After these items have been filed, the Commission will review the matter and issue a final order. There is no specific time linut for issuance of Yhe order. The Commission generally tries to get its orders out within about 30 days, so we expect a final order in late November. The hearing officer's recommenda.tion is well supported by the facts and the law, and we are optimistic that the Commission will accept his recommendation. • Right to Appeal to District Court of Appeal — After the Comm.ission issues its final order, the parties have the right to file an appeal to the District Court of Appeal if either of them believes that the Commission has decided the case inconectly. The notice of appeal would be due 30 days after the issuance of the Commission's final order. If an appeal is taken, it generally takes at least a year to have the matter resolved by the court. • Resolution af Attorney's Fees and Costs — If the Commission's final order requires the PBA to pay the Villags's attorney's fees and costs, then it will schedule another hearing to determine the amount of fees and costs that the PBA is required to pay. If an appea.l is filed, the hearing on attorney's fees would not be held until the appeal is resolved. We anticipate that the PBA will continue to str�ongly contest f.his matter, especially the award of attorney's fees and costs. Therefore, it may be some time before tlze matter is finally resolved. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks again to you and your staff for all your excellent assistance in this case.