One opinion on Friday. This one does not answer the question of "whether predoctoral fellows and trainees are employees for purposes of the State Employees Labor Relations Act (SELRA)." SCOV punts this one back to the Labor Board for further development on the issue.
Petitioner in this case (a union) filed a petition with the Vermont Labor Relations Board (VLRB) seeking to represent a bargaining group consisting of, in nutshell, UVM students employed in academic positions. There's a long-winded definition, but you can read the opinion if you're looking for that kind of detail. UVM objected, arguing that none of those students were employees under SELRA.
The VLRB held a three-day hearing and ultimately concluded that the folks in the union's proposed bargaining unit were, in fact, employees under SELRA, and that predoctoral fellows and trainees were included. UVM appeals only on the predoctoral-fellows-and-trainees-included piece.
One of these days, I'm going to write a summary that uses (overuses) modern slang like "based," "cap," "ghosted," "shook," and the like. Alas, today is not that day, mostly because I have no idea what those terms actually mean and I'm too lazy to learn right now. If and when I do this, I'll probably need to include a glossary. When did I get old?
Anyway . . . SCOV starts off with the union's UVM-waived-its-objection argument. SCOV disagrees, applying what looks at first glance to be a notice-pleading standard. SCOV reasons: "Petitioner offers no authority to support its claim that the University was required to specifically object to the employee status of predoctoral fellows and trainees 'as a disjunctive alternative to its general objection to the employee status' of all members in the proposed bargaining unit." That means we move forward with the analysis.
SCOV notes its deference to the VLRB on appeal and explains, "Our review is thus limited to whether the Board’s factual findings support the Board’s conclusion that predoctoral fellows and trainees work for the University in return for compensation." Assuming that the VLRB's determination of the meaning of "employee" is correct, SCOV nonetheless concludes "the Board unreasonably applied this definition to the employee status of predoctoral fellows and trainees in this case." SCOV explains that "the Board made no findings to support its conclusion that predoctoral fellows and trainees work for the University." While there are some funding controls that UVM oversees, there's not support for the idea that these predoctoral students are working for UVM.
The VLRB made extensive findings about postgraduate fellows and trainees in contrast to its sparse findings about the predoctoral group. Because of this, SCOV reverses and remands.
Are predoctoral fellows and trainees at UVM employees under the SELRA? We're just gonna have to wait and see. In re United Auto Workers, Local 2322, 2025 VT 8.
Comments
Post a Comment