Court of Appeals nixes city's union-busting move.

Byline: Kevin Featherly

Brainerd city officials did the wrong thingalbeit in the right waywhen they killed off a labor union by eliminating all full-time firefighters, theMinnesota Court of Appeals ruledMonday.

By unilaterally eliminating the positionsthereby dismantling the local unionthe city violated the state's Public Employee Labor Relations Act (PELRA), the appeals panel ruled. That statute prohibits as an unfair labor practice governmental interference with the "existence or administration" of a union.

The city prevailed on two other questions, however. It acted properly when it eliminated the positions through a City Council resolution rather than a voter referendum, as firefighters claimed the city's charter requires.

Meanwhile, the union failed to establish that the city retaliated against its president when he opposed the changes in the press and on social media, the Court of Appeals ruled. The restructuring plan was in motion before union President Mark Turner spoke out, the panel found.

The decision reverses in part and upholds in part Crow Wing District Court Earl E. Maus' amended March 18 summary judgment, which went entirely against the union.

Marshall Tanick, the firefighters' attorney, called the published opinion a victory on the firefighters' core PELRA complaint.

It bucks a recent judicial trend against public-sector labor unions, Tanick said, citing the recentJanus v. AFSCMEcase. There, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that public-sector unions cannot automatically collect dues from nonmembers, yet must still bargain on nonmembers' behalf.

"This case may form an important precedent for restoring the balance between the rights of labor union members and management," Tanick said. Its effects might even be felt in the private sector, he said.

Pam VanderWiel, the city's trial attorney, said it's too early to make that call. She said the Janus comparison is off base because Janus was ruled on First Amendment grounds, while the Brainerd decision pivots on statutory interpretation.

"The [appeals] court understood that the city of Brainerd's reasons for the restructuring were financial in nature," she said. "They were not malicious, or an act of wrongdoing or retaliation, under the First Amendment. So we are certainly happy about that."

Retired Court of Appeals Judge Roger M. Klaphake wrote Monday's opinion. He heard the case with Presiding Judge Renee L. Worke and Judge Lucinda Jesson. There were no dissents.

The panel...