Steven H. Schwartz & Associates, P.L.C.

2010 HIRE Act
Court of Appeals Rules that Act 312 Arbitration Panel may Issue an Award for Retroactive Grievance Arbitration
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Provides COBRA Premium Subsidies
Genetic Information
Realizing the Promise of Arbitration
Amendments to the FMLA
SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN PAY DISCRIMINATION CLAIMS
Six Things to Look for In Your Next Employment Contract
Michigan Codifies Garrity Rights for Law Enforcement Officers
Clarification of Garg and Evidence of Discrimination Occurring Outside the Statute of Limitations

Court of Appeals Rules that Act 312 Arbitration Panel may Issue an Award for Retroactive Grievance Arbitration

In Ottawa County v Police Officers Association of Michigan ("POAM"), the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that an Act 312 Arbitration Panel's adoption of the POAM's proposal for retroactive grievance arbitration is not counter to the statute. 281 Mich App 688 (2008). The County, relying on the Court's precedent, argued that Act 312 does not permit an award of non-economic benefits retroactively. The statute, in part, states, "Increases in rates of compensation or other benefits may be awarded retroactively to the commencement of any period(s) in dispute, any other statute or charter provisions to the contrary notwithstanding."

Michigan Codifies Garrity Rights for Law Enforcement Officers

On December 29, 2006, Michigan enacted M.C.L. 15.391, codifying the protection of involuntary statements made by law enforcement officers. Such protection has been in place since the Supreme Court's ruling in Garrity v. State of N.J., 385 U.S. 493 (1967). In Garrity, the Court ruled that public sector employees are in fact under duress and deprived of free choice when asked to either incriminate themselves or forfeit their jobs. Therefore, the use of such statements is prohibited in a subsequent criminal proceeding as involuntary self-incrimination.

Sixth Circuit Encourages En Banc Review of Arbitration Timeliness Disputes

It has been a long-standing judicial precedent that the courts' jurisdiction in determining the arbitrability of arbitration agreements in a collective bargaining agreement is limited to determining whether the dispute is on its face governed by the contract. In other words, courts, not arbitrators, determine if the dispute is to be settled through arbitration. Arbitrators are to make the determination of procedural arbitrability (e.g. whether the parties have complied with procedural requirements under the agreement). (More)

City Manager Exit Agreements

Introduction. City Managers serve in a perilous profession. City Managers are apt to lose their jobs for a number of reasons unrelated to performance or competency: differences in policy or direction, management style, budgeting issues. City Managers may also lose their positions for less rational reasons: jealousy, power plays, retaliation for ordinance enforcement, disagreeing with a strong-willed elected official, scapegoating or other political reasons.

May 2010
June 2009
August 2008
April 2008
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
December 2006
November 2006
August 2006
April 2006

Labor Law [4]
Employment Law [15]

TO OUR SHS Website
SHS HOME
PRACTICE AREAS
OUR ATTORNEYS
CONTACT INFORMATION