1. Proceedings against a party alleging a violation of section 20.10 shall be commenced by filing a complaint with the board within ninety days of the alleged violation, causing a copy of the complaint to be served upon the accused party. The accused party shall have ten days within which to file a written answer to the complaint. However, the board may conduct a preliminary investigation of the alleged violation, and if the board determines that the complaint has no basis in fact, the board may dismiss the complaint. The board shall promptly thereafter set a time and place for hearing in the county where the alleged violation occurred, provided, however, that the presiding officer may conduct the hearing through the use of technology from a remote location. The parties shall be permitted to be represented by counsel, summon witnesses, and request the board to subpoena witnesses on the requester’s behalf. Compliance with the technical rules of pleading and evidence shall not be required.
2. The board may designate one of its members, an administrative law judge, or any other qualified person employed by the board to serve as the presiding officer at the hearing. The presiding officer has the powers as may be exercised by the board for conducting the hearing and shall follow the procedures adopted by the board for conducting the hearing. The proposed decision of the presiding officer may be appealed to the board, or reviewed on motion of the board, in accordance with the provisions of chapter 17A.
3. The board shall appoint a certified shorthand reporter to report the proceedings and the board shall fix the reasonable amount of compensation for such service, and for any transcript requested by the board, which amounts shall be taxed as other costs.
4. The board shall file its findings of fact and conclusions of law within sixty days of the close of any hearing, receipt of the transcript, or submission of any briefs. If the board finds that the party accused has committed a prohibited practice, the board may, within thirty days of its decision, enter into a consent order with the party to discontinue the practice, or after the thirty days following the decision may petition the district court for injunctive relief pursuant to rules of civil procedure 1.1501 to 1.1511.
5. The board’s review of proposed decisions and the rehearing of final decisions is governed by the provisions of chapter 17A. [C75, 77, 79, 81, §20.11] 88 Acts, ch 1109, §6; 89 Acts, ch 296, §6, 7; 91 Acts, ch 174, §2; 2010 Acts, ch 1165, §14; 2023 Acts, ch 19, §2159 Referred to in §20.33 \n
Notes of Decisions
O'Hara v. State, Iowa Dep't of Gen. Servs., 642 N.W.2d 303 (Iowa 2002).
· cites it 20× “” Iowa Code § 20.11 (4). Finally, a public employee has ninety days from the date of the alleged violation to raise a claim for breach of a fair representation duty against the union with the PERB.”
Brown v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 345 N.W.2d 88 (Iowa 1984).
· cites it 16× “Iowa Code section 20.11 provides that proceedings alleging a violation of section 20.”
UE Local 893/IUP v. State of Iowa, 928 N.W.2d 51 (Iowa 2019).
· cites it 4× “Iowa Code § 20.11 (1). In its prohibited-practice complaint, UE alleged that the State had engaged in prohibited practices described in Iowa Code section 20.”
Norton v. Adair Cnty., 441 N.W.2d 347 (Iowa 1989).
· cites it 8× “” Our question is *354 whether this is a grant of exclusive or merely concurrent jurisdiction over complaints alleging a breach of the fair representation duty.”
State v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 744 N.W.2d 357 (Iowa 2008).
· cites it 5× “Section 20.11 sets forth the procedure that must be followed to charge a party with a “prohibited practice violation.”
Pub. Emp. Relations Bd. v. Stohr, 279 N.W.2d 286 (Iowa 1979).
· cites it 2× “” On November 21 and pursuant to section 20.11, Teamsters filed a prohibited practice complaint with PERB, alleging the county had willfully refused to bargain with it on behalf of the above bargaining unit.”
City of Dubuque v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 339 N.W.2d 827 (Iowa 1983).
· cites it 2× “Finally, the court found the board’s order that the two sides meet to construct an appropriate remedy exceeded the board’s remedial authority under Iowa Code section 20.11(4) (“the board may, within thirty days of its decision, enter into a consent order with the party to…”
— Iowa Code § 20.11(1) — 3 cases
Norton v. Adair Cnty., 441 N.W.2d 347 (Iowa 1989).
“” Our question is *354 whether this is a grant of exclusive or merely concurrent jurisdiction over complaints alleging a breach of the fair representation duty.”
O'Hara v. State, Iowa Dep't of Gen. Servs., 642 N.W.2d 303 (Iowa 2002).
“” Iowa Code § 20.11 (4). Finally, a public employee has ninety days from the date of the alleged violation to raise a claim for breach of a fair representation duty against the union with the PERB.”
— Iowa Code § 20.11(2) — 1 case
— Iowa Code § 20.11(4) — 1 case
City of Dubuque v. Pub. Emp. Relations Bd., 339 N.W.2d 827 (Iowa 1983).
“Finally, the court found the board’s order that the two sides meet to construct an appropriate remedy exceeded the board’s remedial authority under Iowa Code section 20.11(4) (“the board may, within thirty days of its decision, enter into a consent order with the party to…”
— Iowa Code § 20.11(5) — 3 cases
O'Hara v. State, Iowa Dep't of Gen. Servs., 642 N.W.2d 303 (Iowa 2002).
“” Iowa Code § 20.11 (4). Finally, a public employee has ninety days from the date of the alleged violation to raise a claim for breach of a fair representation duty against the union with the PERB.”
— Iowa Code § 20.11(9) — 1 case
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.