 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State ex rel Dep't of Human Services v. State Labor Relations Board11/14/2005
DECISION
This case is before the Court on the appeal of Petitioners-State of Rhode Island ("State"); the Department of Children, Youth and Families ("DCYF"); and the Department of Human Services ("DHS" or collectively, "Petitioners")-appeal of a April 6, 2004 decision of the Respondent State Labor Board ("Board"). In that decision, the Board ruled that approximately 1,300 Family Home Day Care Providers ("providers") are state employees. The Board has ordered that an election be held to determine whether these providers wish to unionize so as to bargain with the State. On April 19, 2004, this Court issued a stay prohibiting said election. Petitioners are moving to vacate the Board's decision. Respondents-the Board and the New England Health Care Employees Union, District 1199, SEIU, AFL-CIO ("Union")-object to Petitioners' motion.
Facts
On October 3, 2003, the Employees International Union, District 1199 filed a petition with the Rhode Island State Labor Relations Board, seeking to represent approximately 1300 certified home day care providers. On October 27, 2003, the Board's Investigative Agent conducted an informal hearing on the petition which was attended by representatives of both the Union and the State. The State took the position that it was not the employer of home day care providers and therefore objected to the formation of the bargaining unit. Formal hearings were conducted on January 8, 2004, January 13, 2004 and January 27, 2004. The parties presented numerous documents and the testimony of three witnesses: (1) Ms. Reeva Sullivan Murphy, the Child Care Administrator for the Department of Human Services; (2) Ms. Joanne Flodin, the Licensing and Monitoring Supervisor for the Department of Children, Youth and Families; and (3) Mr. Anthony A. Bucci, Personnel Administrator for the State of Rhode Island. In addition to presenting the documentary evidence and testimony of the witnesses, the parties also submitted voluminous briefs with appendices in support of their respective positions.
On April 6, 2004, the Board rendered its decision, ruling that home day care providers are state employees and have the option of forming a bargaining unit. In reaching its decision, the Board first looked to the Rhode Island State Labor Relations Act and G.L. 1956 ยง 36-11-1, the statute governing the right to organize for bargaining representatives, for statutory guidance. Finding that neither the Labor Relations Act nor Title 36 of the Rhode Island General Laws provided guidance as to the status of home day care providers, the Board turned to case law to determine whether home day care providers are state employees or independent contractors for the purposes of collective bargaining under the State Labor Relations Act. Guided by federal case law, the Board considered thirteen factors that have been developed in analyzing employment relationships. The Board found that the State's right to control providers, the skill required of providers, the location of the work, the state's right to assign additional projects to providers, the method of payment, the providers' role in hiring and paying assistants, the providers' role in offering state services, and the provision for employee benefits-all supported an employer-employee relationship.
In its decision, the Board also addressed the State's contention that the Board lacks jurisdiction to hear this matter because the creation of state employee positions is controlled by statute and a decision that providers are state employees would violate the FTE cap. The Board found the State's argument to be misplaced and concluded that the fact that there is no written or recognized classification of "Family Day Care Provider"
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rhode Island Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|