Featured News

NAGE Attorney Jim Dever

Justice for Trial Court Members with NAGE Arbitration Victories

January 25, 2012

A pair of recent arbitration victories has netted justice for members of the Massachusetts Trial Court. In each case, NAGE Attorney Jim Dever successfully argued at arbitration that the Trial Court had failed to prove just cause in its discipline of the accused members. A brief summary of the cases is provided below.

Member Returned to Work with Up to $30,000 in Back Pay
In a NAGE arbitration victory, an associate court officer who was terminated has been returned to his job with full back pay upwards of $30,000, plus all lost benefits.

NAGE Attorney Jim Dever successfully argued the case before an independent arbitrator, proving that there was no just cause for the termination.

In this case, the associate court officer was accused of misconduct, but the independent arbitrator found that the Trial Court had not conducted a proper investigation and had relied on a single witness to prove the ACO’s guilt.

“We’re obviously thrilled with the outcome of this case and happy to see a member back to work and serving the Commonwealth as he has done so well over the last decade-plus,” said Attorney Dever. “However, it’s shameful that the Trial Court did so little to protect and defend a person’s most basic right to a fair investigation and hearing. Thankfully, there is an arbitration process to put a check on such egregious unfairness and to prohibit the Trial Court from acting as judge, jury, and executioner without fair consideration of the evidence.”

In Important Decision, NAGE Arbitration Victory Reverses Court Officer Transfer
A court officer who was involuntarily and permanently transferred from his courthouse to another in a disciplinary action has been returned to his courthouse following a NAGE arbitration victory. NAGE Attorney Jim Dever successfully argued the case before an independent arbitrator, proving that there was no just cause for the transfer of the court officer. The contract between NAGE and the Trial Court states that management has the right to discipline an employee only if there is just cause to do so.

“We’re very pleased with the outcome of this case," said Dever. "The burden of establishing the existence of just cause rests with management, and in this case, management could not show just cause. Management will no longer be allowed to cover their own staffing shortfalls by violating the just cause standard of discipline defined in the parties' CBA."

In this case, the court officer was given a written reprimand and was transferred from his court as a result of a co-worker’s complaint. NAGE argued that the transfer was actually retaliation for the court officer's prior union conduct and/or double jeopardy. The court officer had earlier been involved in a grievance against the Trial Court over unsanitary working conditions that had been investigated by the area board of health and OSHA.

The Trial Court alleged that it had transferred the court officer—not because of the unsanitary work conditions grievance— but because they had to remove him from the courthouse where the complainant worked. However, the complainant at some point was no longer working at the courthouse, and thus, the potential problem over the "close working relationship" no longer existed. So too, the court officer had already been disciplined over the matter of the complaint by being issued a written reprimand. The transfer after the written reprimand amounted to a kind of double jeopardy and, the union argued, clear retaliation for union activity.

The arbitrator found that there was no just cause to permanently transfer the court officer and subsequently ordered the court officer to be transferred back to his original courthouse.