Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 31 — LABOR · Chapter 560 — Board of Mediation and Arbitration
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-100 (2026)

Annual report. Confidential information

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Said board shall, as provided in section 4-60, make a report to the Governor and shall include therein statements of such facts and explanations as will disclose the actual doings of the board and such suggestions as to legislation as seem to it conducive to harmony in the relations between employers and employees. The board shall hold confidential all information submitted to it by any party to a labor dispute and shall not reveal such information unless specifically authorized to do so by such party.

(1949 Rev., S. 7387; September, 1957, P.A. 11, S. 13; P.A. 75-32.)

History: P.A. 75-32 substituted “labor dispute” for “industrial dispute”.

Cited. 163 C. 327; 171 C. 613. Section exempts grievance arbitration proceedings from open meetings requirements of Freedom of Information Act. 244 C. 487.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1998–2014 · leading case: State Bd. of Labor Relations v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 709 A.2d 1129 (Conn. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Bd. of Labor Relations v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, 709 A.2d 1129 (Conn. 1998). · cites it 32× “; either because they involve strategy or negotiation with respect to collective bargaining, or because the confidentiality requirement of General Statutes § 31-100 3 precludes the proceedings from being open to the public.”
Gould v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n (Conn. 2014). · cites it 3× “If proceedings before the mediation board were required to be conducted publicly, there would be a significant difference between arbitration before that body and privately conducted arbitration.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.