By: Derek Hawkins//October 19, 2016//
WI Court of Appeals – District I
Case Name: Wisconsin Association of State Prosecutors v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission
Case No.: 2015AP2224
Officials: Brennan and Brash, JJ., and Daniel L. LaRocque, Reserve Judge.
Focus: Employment – Statutory Authority
The Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission (the Commission) 1 appeals an order of the circuit court granting the following relief to the Service Employees International Union, Local 150 (Local 150) and the Wisconsin Association of State Prosecutors (WIASP): Declaratory judgment that the Commission exceeded its statutory authority in promulgating the requirement in WIS. ADMIN. CODE §§ ERC 70 and 80 (Aug. 2016) that an existing exclusive representative must file a petition in order to qualify for a recertification election under WIS. STAT. §§ 111.83(3)(b) and 111.70(4)(d)3.b. (2013-14)2 ; Declaratory judgment under WIS. STAT. § 227.40(4)(a) that the provisions in WIS. ADMIN. CODE §§ ERC 70 and 80 requiring an existing exclusive representative to file a petition in order to qualify for recertification are invalid; Reversal of the decisions of the Commission, under WIS. STAT. §§ 227.52 and 227.53, for refusing to hold recertification elections; A writ of prohibition prohibiting the Commission from enforcing the provisions of WIS. ADMIN. CODE §§ ERC 70 and 80 that require an existing exclusive representative to file a petition to qualify for a recertification election; An order granting WIASP and Local 150 recertification elections sought in September 2014 under WIS. STAT. §§ 111.83(3)(b) and 111.70(4)(d)3.b., to be held simultaneously with the December 1, 2015 elections without a new showing of interest and without the necessity of filing a petition; and An order granting that, in the event that WIASP and Local 150 win such elections, their representational status shall be treated as uninterrupted. The Commission argues that the provisions of WIS. ADMIN. CODE §§ ERC 70 and 80 at issue are presumptively valid and reasonable. The Commission further argues that these provisions do not exceed its statutory authority. Upon review, we affirm
Affirmed
Recommended for publication