No employee shall be denied the right to pursue, in a court of competent jurisdiction, a cause of action arising under the state or federal Constitution or under a state statute solely because the employee is covered by a collective bargaining agreement. Nothing in this section shall be construed to give an employee the right to pursue a cause of action in a court of competent jurisdiction for breach of any provision of a collective bargaining agreement or other claims dependent upon the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement.
(P.A. 88-275, S. 1.)
Permits employee, despite prior voluntary submission of a related claim to final arbitration under collective bargaining agreement, to pursue statutory cause of action in Superior Court. 226 C. 475. Cited. 229 C. 801; 236 C. 421. Section does not create independent right to jury determination of damages when it is unclear that any litigant has such a right. 278 C. 692. Although collective bargaining agreement was relevant to degree of economic losses suffered by plaintiff, her indemnification claim was authorized by statute, Sec. 53-39a, and she was not required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to bringing action. 300 C. 708. The phrase “in a court of competent jurisdiction” was not intended to specify the forum in which an employee covered by a collective bargaining agreement may vindicate the right to raise a statutory claim in an agency, but was intended to make clear that the procedures provided for in a collective bargaining agreement would not be the exclusive vehicle by which employees covered by that agreement may vindicate their statutory and constitutional rights; Compensation Review Board correctly determined that section permitted plaintiff to file a claim with the Workers' Compensation Commission pursuant to Sec. 31-290a, despite the fact that the State Board of Mediation and Arbitration had issued an adverse decision on a similar claim in the arbitration proceeding brought pursuant to plaintiff's collective bargaining agreement. 329 C. 366.
Secs. 31-51cc to 31-51gg. Family and medical leave: Definitions, length of leave, eligibility. Prohibition of discrimination. Regulations, report. Phase-in provisions. Report on establishment of state-wide job bank. Sections 31-51cc to 31-51gg, inclusive, are repealed, effective January 1, 1997.
(P.A. 89-382, S. 1–6; P.A. 95-79, S. 113, 189; P.A. 96-140, S. 9, 10.)
Notes of Decisions
Spiotti v. Town of Wolcott, 163 A.3d 46 (Conn. 2017).
· cites it 25× “The plaintiff, Doreen Spiotti, was a member of the International Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 332 (union), and was employed as a police officer in the Wolcott Police Department (department).”
Genovese v. Gallo Wine Merchants, Inc., 628 A.2d 946 (Conn. 1993).
· cites it 33× “2d 935 ] (1988), have on the judgment under appeal? (2) What effect, if any, does General Statutes § 31-51bb have on the judgment under appeal?” 6 We have previously held that an employee’s failure to exhaust the grievance and arbitration procedures available under a collective…”
Williams v. City of New Haven, 186 A.3d 1158 (Conn. 2018).
· cites it 47× “2d 946 (1993), this court held that, under General Statutes § 31-51bb, principles of collateral estoppel do not bar a claimant, who had previously brought a grievance pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement, from bringing a statutory cause of action in the Superior Court…”
Nyenhuis v. Metro. Dist. Comm'n, 22 A.3d 1181 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 12× “That court concluded that “the grievance procedure [was] futile or inadequate because under § 53-39a, a plaintiff police officer may seek damages for economic loss that *714 are potentially greater than the relief available pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement” and,…”
Jackson v. Water Pollution Control Auth., 900 A.2d 498 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 7× “The plaintiff relies specifically on General Statutes § 31-51bb, which provides that persons employed pursuant to collective bargaining agreements shall not be denied the right to pursue statutory or constitutional claims where such claims exist.”
Hunt v. Prior, 673 A.2d 514 (Conn. 1996).
· cites it 5× “§ 1983 , do not arise under any constitutional or state statutory provision, § 31-51bb does not relieve the plaintiff of his obligation to exhaust the administrative remedies available to him under the collective bargaining agreement.”
Gerardi v. City of Bridgeport, 985 A.2d 328 (Conn. 2010).
· cites it 6× “The plaintiffs objected to the motions, claiming that General Statutes § 31-51bb 4 permitted them to pursue their actions without first exhausting the available administrative remedy because § 31-48d authorizes a cause of action against the city.”
State v. Courchesne, 816 A.2d 562 (Conn. 2003).
· cites it 2× “2d 946 (1993) (interpreting General Statutes § 31-51bb in light of purpose to overrule Kolenberg v.”
State v. Hodge, 726 A.2d 531 (Conn. 1999).
· cites it 3× “The plaintiff in this case failed to raise his claim under [General Statutes] § 31-51bb both in the trial court and initially before this court.”
Wanamaker v. Town of Westport Bd. of Educ., 11 F. Supp. 3d 51 (D. Conn. 2014).
· cites it 3× “Additionally, Connecticut would not give preclusive effect to the findings of the Panel because Conn. Gen.Stat. § 31-51bb explicitly provides that a statutory claim cannot be lost just because an employee is covered by a collective bargaining agreement.”
Santana v. City of Hartford, 894 A.2d 307 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 3× “” 19 General Statutes § 31-51bb provides: “No employee shall be denied the right to pursue, in a court of competent jurisdiction, a cause of action arising under the state or federal Constitution or under a state statute solely because the employee is covered by a collective…”
Imperial Cas. & Indem. Co. v. State, 714 A.2d 1230 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 2× “In Genovese , the plaintiff failed to advance his claim under General Statutes § 31-51bb both in the trial court and initially before this court.”
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.