The union filed an unfair labor practice complaint against the city alleging that the city
breached the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), violated the obligation of good faith, and
invalidated portions of the CBA because the city used non-bargaining unit employees to do
bargaining unit work.  The union claimed that the parties arbitrated a similar issue previously,
which resulted in an arbitration award in favor of the union, and that the city disregarded the
arbitration award by authorizing actions previously found to be a violation of the CBA.  The
union did not grieve the incident at issue in this matter claiming that the grievance procedure
was allegedly unworkable, and that the grievance was not required given the previous
arbitration award.  The city denied the charges claiming that the previous arbitration decision
was not controlling the present matter, that the work at issue was not exclusively bargaining
unit work, and that the present dispute should have been addressed through the contractual
grievance procedure.

The PELRB found that the subject matter of the union's complaint should have been
addressed through the grievance procedure contained in the CBA because the question of
whether the previous arbitration award constituted a binding precedent was the question to
be determined in arbitration since the previous arbitration award did not clearly dictate the
scope of its precedential effect.  The PELRB dismissed the union's complaint.

Disclaimer: This summary is intended to provide a brief description of the issues in this case
and the outcome.  The summary is not a substitute for the decision, should not be relied upon
in place of the decision, and should not be cited as controlling or relevant authority in PELRB
proceedings or other proceedings.