(a) The services of the State Board of Mediation and Arbitration shall be available to municipal employers and employee organizations for purposes of mediation of grievances or impasses in contract or contract reopener negotiations and for purposes of arbitration of disputes over the interpretation or application of the terms of a written agreement and, if such service is requested by both the municipal employer and the employee organization except as provided in section
7-473c for purposes of arbitration of impasses in contract or contract reopener negotiations. Whenever any impasse in contract or contract reopener negotiations is submitted to arbitration, the decision of the arbitration panel or arbitrator shall be rendered no later than twenty days prior to the final date by which time the budget-appropriating authority of the municipality is required to adopt its budget or forty days after the close of the arbitration hearing, whichever is later, provided that in no case except when such arbitration service is requested or mandated after the final budget adoption date shall such decision be rendered later than five days prior to such final budget adoption date. Nothing contained herein shall prevent any agreement from being entered into in accordance with the provisions of subsection (e) of section
7-474.
(b) Nothing in this section is intended to prevent the use of other arbitration tribunals in the resolution of disputes over the interpretation or application of the terms of written agreements between municipal employers and employee organizations.
(February, 1965, P.A. 159, S. 6; 1967, P.A. 491, S. 5; P.A. 75-570, S. 5; P.A. 82-37, S. 1; P.A. 93-17, S. 5, 6.)
History: 1967 act substituted “impasses in contract negotiations” for “contract disputes” in mediation provision and empowered board to arbitrate such impasses upon request of both parties, setting forth the arbitration procedure with time constraints on decision, etc., in Subsec. (a); P.A. 75-570 added exception to provision allowing arbitration of contract impasses, changed requirement that decision be rendered no later than 10 days after hearing to 40 days and added exception to final deadline of 5 days before budget adoption date for cases in which arbitration not instituted until after final deadline; P.A. 82-37 applied provisions of Subsec. (a) to “contract reopener” negotiations; P.A. 93-17 amended Subsec. (a) to delete obsolete reference to Subsecs. (h) to (k), inclusive, of Sec. 7-474, effective April 21, 1993.
Cited. 159 C. 49; 171 C. 347; Id., 353; Id., 553, 564. State Board of Mediation and Arbitration may not arbitrate grievances except as they apply to disputes over interpretation or application of terms of a written agreement, or, by agreement, in cases of impasse in contract negotiations. Id., 613. Cited. 175 C. 349. Standing to test constitutionality of binding arbitration provisions of Municipal Employees Relations Act discussed. 181 C. 421. Cited. 182 C. 93; 185 C. 88; 196 C. 192; 200 C. 38; 201 C. 577; 204 C. 746; 205 C. 116; 210 C. 549; 212 C. 294; 215 C. 14; 217 C. 110; 221 C. 244; 225 C. 297; 234 C. 123.
Cited. 3 CA 1; 16 CA 232; 33 CA 541.
A public announcement of plaintiff's intention to file a prohibited practice complaint against a union is protected by the Municipal Employees Relations Act when the complaint is actually filed at a later date. 31 CS 7. Cited. 42 CS 227; 43 CS 470.
Notes of Decisions
City of Hartford v. Hartford Mun. Employees Ass'n, 788 A.2d 60 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 5× “General Statutes § 7-472 provides: “Mediation by State Board of Mediation and Arbitration, (a) The services of the State Board of Mediation and Arbitration shall be available to municipal employers and employee organizations for purposes of mediation of grievances or impasses in…”
Bd. of Police Commissioners v. Maher, 370 A.2d 1076 (Conn. 1976).
· cites it 8× “court’s conclusion that the defendant union and the city of New Haven, by contract, have conferred on the defendant board of mediation and arbitration the authority to arbitrate grievances concerning disciplinary action against police officers and by the defendants’ assigned…”
Bd. of Educ. v. State Bd. of Labor Relations, 584 A.2d 1172 (Conn. 1991).
· cites it 3× “See General Statutes § 7-472. 9 *119 The labor board’s own decisions support our interpretation, as they have repeatedly cited § 10-153e (b) (4), not (b) (5), when finding unfair labor practices in situations similar to the one now before us.”
Piteau v. Bd. of Educ., 15 A.3d 1067 (Conn. 2011).
· cites it 4× “In support of this contention, the plaintiff cites several decisions of the board of labor relations in which that board, in recognition of the fact that the state board of mediation and arbitration is charged with interpreting collective bargaining agreements and resolving…”
City of Norwalk v. Connecticut State Bd. of Labor Relations, 538 A.2d 694 (Conn. 1988).
“(6) refusing to comply with a grievance settlement, or arbitration settlement, or a valid award or decision of an arbitration panel or arbitrator rendered in accordance with the provisions of section 7-472.” The Connecticut Freedom of Information Act, codified as General…”
City of Hartford v. Local 308, 370 A.2d 996 (Conn. 1976).
“*428 Section 7-472 of the General Statutes states that the services of the board shall be available to municipal employers and employee organizations “for purposes of arbitration of disputes over the interpretation or application of the terms of a written agreement.”
Int'l Bhd. of Police Officers, Local 564 v. Borough of Jewett City, 661 A.2d 573 (Conn. 1995).
“r shall appropriate whatever funds are required to comply with a collective bargaining agreement, provided the request called for in subsection (b) of this section has been approved by the legislative body of such municipal employer, or with a collective bargaining agreement…”
Perkowski v. Stratford Bd. of Educ., 455 F. Supp. 2d 91 (D. Conn. 2006).
“The Attorney General based his opinion upon the language of Connecticut General Statutes § 31-97(a), bolstered by the application of § 7-472. Id.; Conn. Gen. Stats. § 31-97(a) (“Whenever a grievance or dispute arises between an employer and his employees, the parties may submit…”
Local 1183 of Council No. 4 v. State Bd. of Labor Relations, 636 A.2d 1366 (Conn. App. Ct. 1994).
· cites it 5× “” In 1986 or 1987, the union filed a grievance with the arbitration board pursuant to General Statutes § 7-472, 2 part of the Municipal Employees Relations Act, claiming that the town had violated the contract with regard to the distribution of overtime.”
Bd. of Educ. v. Connecticut Bd. of Labor Relations, 530 A.2d 588 (Conn. 1987).
· cites it 2× “scuss grievances with the representatives of an employee organization designated as the exclusive representative in an appropriate unit in accordance with the provisions of said sections; (6) refusing to comply with a grievance settlement, or arbitration settlement, or a valid…”
Brass City Local, CACP v. Waterbury, 254 A.3d 866 (Conn. 2020).
· cites it 3× “Specifically, the city argued that § 7-470 (a) (6), by its express terms, applies only to grievance arbitration awards rendered in accordance with the provisions of General Statutes § 7-472, whereas the parties’ interest arbitration award was rendered in accordance with the…”
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.