Skip Maine state header navigation

Agencies | Online Services | Web Policies | Help  Email this page to a friendWatch this page and email me when it is updatedAdd this page to My Maine.gov Links

Skip First Level Navigation | Skip All Navigation

Home > Recent Decisions and Library Copies

Recent MLRB Decisions

As the MLRB issues new decisions, they will be formatted for publication on this website and a link to the decision will be added to this page. Below are links to the most recent decisions, and a very brief summary of the case.

October 7, 2009, Androscoggin Superior Court Decision, Lewiston School Department v. MSEA and MLRB, Docket No. AP-09-001 (pdf) or AP-09-001 (html), affirming Board Decision No. 09-05.

The Court affirmed the Board's decision on how to define the status quo that must be maintained for health insurance premium costs after the expiration of the collective bargaining agreement while the parties are negotiating a successor agreement.

August 21, 2009, MSEA v. State of Maine, Dept. of Public Safety, Case No. 09-13 (pdf) or 09-13 (html) Decision and Order

Board dismissed the complaint because the facts alleged did not constitute a violation of the Act. Issue was whether the employer's discussions with employee about unpaid personal leave request constituted direct dealing.

January 28, 2009, Sanford Police Association v. Town of Sanford, Case No. 09-04 (pdf) or 09-04 (html) Interim Order

Interim Order addressed Board's lack of jurisdiction over First Amendment issues and related matters regarding evidence supporting an interference, restraint or coercion charge.

January 15, 2009, MSEA v. Lewiston School Department, Case No. 09-05 (pdf) or 09-05 (html)

The question presented was how to define the status quo that must be maintained for health insurance premium costs when the collective bargaining agreement has expired and the parties are negotiating a successor agreement.

January 15, 2009, Interpretive Ruling, Case No. 08-IR-01 (pdf) or 08-IR-01 (html)

This is an interpretive ruling on whether certain subjects are educational policy.

November 14, 2008, MLRB-Initiated Interpretive Ruling, Case No. 09-IR-01 (pdf) or 09-IR-01 (html)

This is an interpretive ruling on bargaining during the transition from School Administrative Units to Regional School Units.

June 23, 2008, AFSCME Council 93 (petitioner) and Town of Sanford (employer), Case no. 08-UC-02 Unit Clarification Report

The Hearing Examiner concluded that the changes to the General Assistance Director position since the formation of the unit were not "changed circumstances" sufficient to support a petition to review the unit placement of the position within the meaning of section 966(3) .

June 18, 2008, David J. Jordan v. AFSCME, Council 93, AFL-CIO, Case No. 07-15 Decision and Order.

The question presented was whether AFSCME breached its duty of fair representation by failing to represent all of the job classifications in the bargaining unit during the negotiation process with the school district and by failing to address the concerns raised by certain union members during the contract ratification process.

October 26, 2007, Stephen Marean (petitioner) and Local 740, IAFF (bargaining agent) and City of Portland (employer), Case No. 07-UD-22, Unit Determination Report.

The Hearing Examiner concluded that it was not appropriate to sever out a unit of Paramedics, Firefighter/Paramedics, and Firefighter/Paramedic Lieutenants from the existing Portland Firefighters bargaining unit.

June 1, 2007, AFSCME, Council 93, AFL-CIO v. Lincoln County Commissioners, Lincoln County Sheriff's Department, and Lincoln County's Agent, Case No. 06-24 Decision and Order.

The question presented was whether the Employer's discussions with a unit employee concerning wages and benefits for a position not in the bargaining unit and assurances regarding his later return to the unit constituted direct dealing.

May 22, 2007, School Union #44 Professional Assistants Assoc./MEA and School Union #44, Case No. 07-UD-16 Unit Determination Report.

The Hearing Examiner concluded that the administrative assistant to the superintendent is a confidential employee within the meaning of section 962(6)(C) and should be excluded from the central office bargaining unit.

February 12, 2007, Challenge of Ballots in the Decertification/ Bargaining Agent Election for the MSAD #5 Bus Drivers' Bargaining Unit, Case No. 07-E-01, Executive Director's Decision.

After an evidentiary hearing, the Hearing Examiner concluded that neither of the employees whose ballots were challenged were in the bargaining unit. Consequently, their ballots could not be opened or counted in the election and a runoff election is required.

January 16, 2007, County of Cumberland v. Teamsters Union Local 340. Case No. 07-UDA-01, Decision and Order on Unit Determination Appeal.

The issue was whether the petitioned-for bargaining unit for a single job classification was appropriate or should the classification have been placed in an existing bargaining unit.

 

November 21, 2006, Teamsters Union Local 340 v. Jay School Department. Case No. 06-22, Decision and Order.

Question was whether Employer's communications with unit members regarding a proposed change in work schedules constituted direct dealing.

 

June 12, 2006, AFSCME Council 93 and City of South Portland. Case No. 06-UD-10, Unit Determination Report. (Bargaining unit for the South Portland Library.)

Primary question was whether three specific positions should be excluded from the agreed-upon unit due to supervisory responsibilities.

 

May 11, 2006, William D. Neily v. State of Maine and Maine State Employees Association, Local 1989, SEIU, Case No. 06-13, Decision on Appeal of Executive Director's Dismissal of Complaint.

Question was whether there was a basis for tolling the start of the 6 month time limit for filing a complaint and whether the complainant had standing to pursue a complaint alleging a failure to bargain. Board's decision affirmed by the Law Court on May 15, 2007 (mem.)

 

May 11, 2006, MSAD #29 Board of Directors v. MSAD #29 Education Association/MEA/NEA, Case No. 06-UCA-01, Decision and Order on Unit Clarification Appeal.

The employer appealed the Hearing Examiner's decision adding the certified occupational therapy assistant position to the existing Educational Technicians/School Secretary bargaining unit.

 

Library Copies of Board Decisions Issued Since Early 2004.

In addition to the decisions in our searchable database, we have added to this website pdf files of decisions issued since early 2004. We refer to these as library copies and they replace the hard copies we mailed to interested parties up until that time. These pdf files enable you obtain a printed version with the same pagination as the original decision. We are unable to provide pdf files for decisions issued before 2004.