American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. Wayne County
292 Mich. App. 68
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- WCC argued it has exclusive authority to assign a court clerk to a judge's courtroom under LAO 2005-06.
- AFSCME union contended the CBA and its arbitration award control clerk assignments, as implemented by the county and county clerk, prior to LAO 2005-06.
- Arbitrator’s ruling in 2004 sided with the union on seniority-based clerk placement; the county refused to comply after 2004.
- LAO 2005-06, issued June 2, 2005, stated the county clerk shall assign a court clerk per judge-approved pool, superseding arbitration and limiting seniority.
- WCC accepted LAO 2005-06 and sought to enforce it; the county clerk and union disputed its supremacy over the CBA.
- Trial court granted summary disposition in favor of the union; this Court reversed, ruling for the WCC and remanding for judgment in its favor.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the WCC have exclusive authority to assign court clerks? | Union argues CBA/arbitration govern. | WCC asserts inherent judicial powers and LAO 2005-06 control. | WCC has exclusive authority; LAO 2005-06 proper. |
| Does PERA bind the WCC to enforce the CBA/arbitration over LAO 2005-06? | PERA requires bargaining and enforces CBA terms on assignments. | PERA yields to judiciary’s inherent powers when conflict arises; | PERA cannot prevail where it infringes the judiciary’s inherent powers. |
| Do statutes or constitutional provisions requiring judicial or clerk-appointment approvals override LAO 2005-06? | Statutes (e.g., MCL 600.579(1)) support clerk appointment without judge input. | Constitutional inherent powers control; statutes cannot override them. | Inherent judicial powers trump conflicting statutes; LAO 2005-06 valid in this context. |
Key Cases Cited
- Judicial Attorneys Ass’n v Michigan, 459 Mich 291 (1998) (struck down broad local-judicial-employer statutes as encroaching on judiciary's power)
- Lapeer Co Clerk v Lapeer Circuit Court, 469 Mich 146 (2003) (county clerk as clerk of the circuit court; judiciary controls noncustodial ministerial duties)
- City of Warren, 411 Mich 642 (1981) (PERA prevails over conflicting laws regarding mandatory bargaining subjects)
- Kalamazoo Police Supervisors’ Ass’n v City of Kalamazoo, 130 Mich App 513 (1983) (PERA dominates when conflict with charter/constitution occurs on bargaining subjects)
- In re Petition for a Representation Election Among Supreme Court Staff Employees, 406 Mich 647 (1979) (separation of powers precludes PERA from infringing judiciary's core authority)
- 74th Judicial Dist Judges, 385 Mich 710 (1969) (peripherals of PERA and separation of powers context (cited for separation principles))