Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Florida Public Employees Council 79 v. State
Citations: 939 So. 2d 121; 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 14005; 2006 WL 2402859Docket: No. 1D05-3515
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; August 22, 2006; Florida; State Appellate Court
The Florida Public Employees Council 79, AFSCME, AFL-CIO (the union) appeals a Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) order that dismissed its unfair labor practice (ULP) charge against the State of Florida. The union claimed that the state violated its collective bargaining agreement (CBA) by refusing to arbitrate a grievance related to layoffs at the Department of Children and Families, in accordance with the “bumping” procedure outlined in Florida Administrative Code Rule 60K-17. The court concluded that Rule 60K-17 had been revised by the "Service First" legislation (chapter 2001-43, Laws of Florida), which was implemented through Rule 60L-33.004, establishing a new layoff procedure that considered comparative merit, demonstrated skills, and employee experience. The court affirmed PERC's dismissal, noting that similar facts were addressed in Florida Public Employees Council v. State, 921 So.2d 676 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), where PERC found that the CBA's layoff provisions could no longer be enforced following the enactment of the Service First Initiative. Unlike in the previous case, the court determined that by the time the layoffs occurred, Rule 60L-33.004 was effective, meaning the state was not obligated to follow Rule 60K-17. The CBA contains a provision (Article 33) stating that if any contract provision conflicts with state laws due to new legislation, it would not be enforceable. Consequently, the court affirmed the dismissal of the ULP charge. Judges ERVIN, WEBSTER, and PADOVANO concurred.