Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.666 (2026)

Certified or recognized labor organization as exclusive employee group representative

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      243.666 Certified or recognized labor organization as exclusive employee group representative. (1) A labor organization certified by the Employment Relations Board or recognized by the public employer is the exclusive representative of the employees of a public employer for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to employment relations.

      (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, an individual employee or group of employees at any time may present grievances to their employer and have such grievances adjusted, without the intervention of the labor organization, if:

      (a) The adjustment is not inconsistent with the terms of a collective bargaining contract or agreement then in effect; and

      (b) The labor organization has been given opportunity to be present at the adjustment.

      (3) Nothing in this section prevents a public employer from recognizing a labor organization which represents at least a majority of employees as the exclusive representative of the employees of a public employer when the board has not designated the appropriate bargaining unit or when the board has not certified an exclusive representative in accordance with ORS 243.686. [Formerly 243.735; 1983 c.740 §65; 2019 c.429 §9]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1975–2020 · leading case: Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Oregon State Univ., 567 P.2d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Oregon State Univ., 567 P.2d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 8× “The better part of OSEA’s argument is derived from ORS 243.666(1) which provides: "A labor organization certified by the Employment Relations Board or recognized by the public employer is the exclusive representative of the employes of a public employer for the purposes of…”
Oregon AFSCME Council 75 v. OJD - Yamhill Cnty., 304 Or. App. 794 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “ORS 243.666(1). In this case, Oregon AFSCME Council 75 (AFSCME) petitioned the Employment Relations Board (ERB) to cer- tify it as the exclusive representative of a bargaining unit consisting of 27 nonsupervisory employees working in the Yamhill County Circuit Court.”
Sizemore v. Kulongoski, 905 P.2d 1146 (Or. 1995). · cites it 2× “650(10) provides in part: "`Fair-share agreement' means an agreement between the public employer and the recognized or certified bargaining representative of public employees whereby employees who are not members of the employee organization are required to make an…”
Reynolds Sch. Dist. v. Oregon Sch. Employees Ass'n, 650 P.2d 119 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 4× “See ORS 243.666(1). There was apparently no voluntary recognition in Port of Portland .”
Elvin v. Oregon Pub. Employes Union, 832 P.2d 36 (Or. 1992). · cites it 2× “[3] ORS 243.666 provides, in part: "(1) A labor organization certified by the Employment Relations Board or recognized by the public employer is the exclusive representative of the employees of a public employer for the purposes of collective bargaining with respect to…”
Dale v. Kulongoski, 894 P.2d 462 (Or. 1995). · cites it 2× “650(10) defines the term: "`Fair-share agreement' means an agreement between the public employer and the recognized or certified bargaining representative of public employees whereby employees who are not members of the employee organization are required to make an…”
Coleman v. Child.'s Servs. Div., 694 P.2d 555 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “ORS 243.666(1) provides that a labor organization certified by ERB is the exclusive representative of the employes of a public employer with respect to employment relations.”
Bosak v. Myers, 33 P.3d 970 (Or. 2001). “1 Unions and employers operating in the private sector negotiate various forms of union security agreements. See Patrick Hardin et al., eds., The Developing Labor Law: The Board, the Courts, and the National Labor Relations Act (3rd ed 1992).”
Kain v. Myers, 38 P.3d 266 (Or. 2001). “650(10) defines “fair-share agreement” in part as follows: “ ‘Fair-share agreement’ means an agreement between the public employer and the recognized or certified bargaining representative of public employees whereby employees who are not members of the employee organization are…”
Willamin a Sch. Dist. 30J v. Willamina Educ. Ass'n, 655 P.2d 189 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “ORS 243.666(3). 5 Here, the District and the Association agreed that regular teachers are part of the bargaining unit and that substitutes are not.”
Chambers v. Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees Int'l Union, AFL-CIO (D. Or. 2020). · cites it 8× “650(8) (2017); ORS § 243.666 (2017). Another part authorized public employers to collect fair-share fees and provide them to the unions to cover the costs associated with collective-bargaining representation.”
Towers v. Rosenblum, 310 P.3d 1136 (Or. 2013). “ORS 243.666(1); ORS 243.672(l)(c). Under those agreements, public employees choosing not to join a union are nevertheless responsible for a proportional share of the representation costs incurred by the union, collected as “payment-in-lieu-of-dues” sums.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.666(1) — 8 cases
Oregon State Employes Ass'n v. Oregon State Univ., 567 P.2d 1085 (Or. Ct. App. 1977). “The better part of OSEA’s argument is derived from ORS 243.666(1) which provides: "A labor organization certified by the Employment Relations Board or recognized by the public employer is the exclusive representative of the employes of a public employer for the purposes of…”
Oregon AFSCME Council 75 v. OJD - Yamhill Cnty., 304 Or. App. 794 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “ORS 243.666(1). In this case, Oregon AFSCME Council 75 (AFSCME) petitioned the Employment Relations Board (ERB) to cer- tify it as the exclusive representative of a bargaining unit consisting of 27 nonsupervisory employees working in the Yamhill County Circuit Court.”
Reynolds Sch. Dist. v. Oregon Sch. Employees Ass'n, 650 P.2d 119 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). “See ORS 243.666(1). There was apparently no voluntary recognition in Port of Portland .”
Coleman v. Child.'s Servs. Div., 694 P.2d 555 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “ORS 243.666(1) provides that a labor organization certified by ERB is the exclusive representative of the employes of a public employer with respect to employment relations.”
Towers v. Rosenblum, 310 P.3d 1136 (Or. 2013). “ORS 243.666(1); ORS 243.672(l)(c). Under those agreements, public employees choosing not to join a union are nevertheless responsible for a proportional share of the representation costs incurred by the union, collected as “payment-in-lieu-of-dues” sums.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 243.666(3) — 5 cases
Reynolds Sch. Dist. v. Oregon Sch. Employees Ass'n, 650 P.2d 119 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). “See ORS 243.666(1). There was apparently no voluntary recognition in Port of Portland .”
Willamin a Sch. Dist. 30J v. Willamina Educ. Ass'n, 655 P.2d 189 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). “ORS 243.666(3). 5 Here, the District and the Association agreed that regular teachers are part of the bargaining unit and that substitutes are not.”
Port of Portland v. Mun. Employees, Local 483, 556 P.2d 692 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
Nance v. Oregon State Sys. of Higher Educ., 543 P.2d 687 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
Oregon Pub. Employees Union v. State Corr. Dep't, 839 P.2d 276 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
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.