Duties of board
- rules
Source:
Section 240.086 — Duties of board; rules, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors240.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where after long, exceptional service, petitioner only recently developed disqualifying characteristics in the area of supervision, the board properly overruled the public employer’s dismissal of him and ordered his demotion to the highest level nonsupervisory position. James v. Employment Div., 20 Or App 309, 531 P2d 710 (1975), Sup Ct review denied
The Employment Relations Board was without jurisdiction to hear a charge of sex discrimination. Phillips v. Dept. of Rev., 23 Or App 748, 544 P2d 196 (1975)
The Personnel Division is not required to set forth in job announcements its evaluative criteria to be applied in ranking those who meet the required qualifications. Paul v. Personnel Div., 28 Or App 603, 560 P2d 293 (1977)
The board may make a de novo review of the facts that were the basis of an appointing authority’s decision to discharge a public employe; overruling Phillips v. State Bd. of Higher Educ., 7 Or App 588, 490 P2d 5 (1971), Sup Ct review denied and Thompson v. Secretary of State, 19 Or App 73, 526 P2d 621 (1974), Sup Ct review denied. Fairview Hospital and Training Center v. Stanton, 28 Or App 643, 560 P2d 667 (1977)
Where Personnel Division had statutory responsibility for classification and compensation plans for classified service, Forestry Department did not have authority to promulgate directive binding division to include within restructuring-reclassification proposal request for salary increases for all employes placed into classification with higher salary range. Berry v. State Forestry Dept., 35 Or App 703, 582 P2d 473 (1978), Sup Ct review denied
In proceeding initiated by Oregon State Employes Association under this section, ERB lacked jurisdiction to determine whether Personnel Division hiring and promotion practices violated Merit System Law, where no specific “affected party” was named. OSEA v. Personnel Division, 36 Or App 353, 585 P2d 1 (1978)
Three month performance appraisal before layoff was reasonable under this section where applicable statutes and rules required only that performance appraisal be completed before layoff, that length of service and appraisal be considered, and that appraisals be used to determine order of layoffs. Duncan v. Law Enforcement Council, 37 Or App 119, 586 P2d 398 (1978), Sup Ct review denied
Where power was given by this section to Employment Relations Board to decide grievances, refusal by Department of General Services to submit matter to binding arbitration was not unfair labor practice. OSEA v. Dept. of General Services, 39 Or App 157, 592 P2d 562 (1979)
Making arbitration award unenforceable if it “is in violation of law” permits ERB to review only to determine if award itself would require violation of law and not to determine whether arbitrator’s underlying legal conclusions are correct. Federation of Oregon Parole Officers v. Corrections Div., 67 Or App 559, 679 P2d 868 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
Employment Relations Board authority to modify or set aside personnel action regarding management service employee is limited to action described under ORS 240.560. Knutzen v. Dept. of Insurance and Finance, 129 Or App 565, 879 P2d 1335 (1994)
Attorney General Opinions
Right of a nonlawyer union business agent to represent a member before the board, (1972) Vol 35, p 1088
Up to date