Public Unions and Court Cases

Legal Decisions for Fire and Emergency Services

The American legal system is based upon case precedent and the way the courts are interpreting the law. The result is that there will be shifts in how these concepts are applied with each other. In the case of fire and emergency services, the issue is further complicated from the municipality's policies, procedures and relevant laws. To determine the overall scope of these activities requires focusing on various court cases and the impact of these decisions. Together, these elements will illustrate the effect they are having on fire and emergency services. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)

The Impact of recent Legal Decisions on Fire and Emergency Services

There will be a total of 11 different court cases analyzed. The most notable include: Dedham v. Labor Relations Committee, IAFF Local 2010 v. City of Homestead International, Association of Fire Fighters Local 2905 v. Town of Hartford, Fire Fighters Union v. City of Vallejo, IAFF Local 669 v. Scranton, IAFF Local 314 v. City of Scranton, St. Bernard v. State Employee Relations Board, Watts v. City of Norman, IAFF Local 93 v. City of Cleveland, Jerry o. Smith v City of Des Moines and Minch v. City of Chicago. Each one of these transformed the interpretations of various laws and case precedent. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)

Dedham v. Labor Relations Committee involves a firefighter who was fired by the city of Dedham. He appealed to the Civil Service Commission, who upheld the decision. In response, the plaintiff filed a complaint with the Labor Relations Board and is suing in federal court to have it reversed. The U.S. Court of appeals determined that there were critical errors in the way the law was interpreted (with them upholding the pervious decisions). They ruled that the firefighter should be reinstated. However, they left the scope this to the state Supreme Court (by remanding the case back to them). IAFF Local 2010 v. City of Homestead International is focusing on the way fire department negotiates with employees. In this case, the union is challenging the city of Homestead's policies on negotiating with its employees. They sued for violating their basic rights by not being transparent throughout the process. The lower court awarded them compensatory and punitive damages. U.S. Court of Appeals is asked to review the decision by the city. They upheld the damages against the defendant. However, they ruled that in order to prove the case, the plaintiff must show that there were direct conflicts of interest. Association of Fire Fighters Local 2905 v. Town of Hartford questions if the Fire Chief is a legitimate authority to engage in collective bargaining. This is because he plays a role as a supervisor and is not a designated representative of the union. The lower court determined that this person cannot participate in negotiations. The Vermont Supreme Court agreed and upheld the decision. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)

Fire Fighters Union v. City of Vallejo is concentrating on if the city of Vallejo, California can layoff firefighters without union representation or collective bargaining. The lower court decided in favor of the union. The city is appealing to the Federal Court of Appeals. They determined that these policies are in direction violation of collective bargaining laws and Title VII. As a result, they reversed the decision and remanded it back to the California Supreme Court to resolve. IAFF Local 669 v. Scranton involves the city of Scranton claiming how their fire department is facing financial difficulties. In response, they cut pay and benefits without union approval. The lower courts found that they violated collective bargaining laws and compensated employees in the form of lost benefits and salary. The U.S. Court of Appeals decided in favor of the firefighters. IAFF Local 314 v. City of Scranton is examining minimum standards of staffing. These challenges began when Scranton reduced these levels without the union. The union sued and received a favorable ruling in the lower courts. The U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the decision. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)

St. Bernard v. State Employee Relations Board is challenging a city's refusal to work with the local union. The lower courts determined that they are in violation of their collective bargaining rights. However, the Court of Appeals found that these provisions are not relevant with the state having a law that prohibits collective bargaining. Watts v. City of Norman involves discrimination against an African-American firefighter who was involved in fight with a Caucasian. The lower court decided in favor of the city. The U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the ruling against Watts. IAFF Local 93 v. City of Cleveland is about the city of Cleveland having to follow quotas in its hiring practices. The lower court ruled that these caps can be removed with the department hiring more minority candidates. The U.S. Court Appeals ruled the lower court judge did not have this authority to do this and reinstated the quotas. (Painter, 2012) (Tworney, 2009)