CITY OF JENKS v. STONE
2014 OK 11
| Okla. | 2014Background
- Jenks filed a declaratory judgment to determine if Stone, a probationary police trainee, is an at-will employee and not entitled to a board of review under 11 O.S. 50-123.
- Stone was a police trainee not covered by the city’s collective bargaining agreement and was an OPPRS member.
- Jenks and Lodge 146 had a collective bargaining agreement that governed grievances/arbitration for permanent officers, not Stone.
- Stone requested a board of review hearing under §50-123 after discharge; Jenks denied any hearing.
- The district court granted summary judgment to Jenks; the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed; the Oklahoma Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does 50-123(B) give probationary trainees an employment-rights entitlement? | Stone argues probationary trainees have a right to be discharged for cause and to a board hearing. | Jenks argues trainees are not protected by §50-123(B) as members and are excluded by the bargaining agreement. | No; probationary trainees do not have such rights. |
| Should the term 'member' in §50-123 be read to include probationary trainees? | Stone contends trainees are 'members' under §50-123(B). | Jenks contends 'member' excludes probationary trainees to avoid absurd results. | The term 'member' does not include probationary trainees. |
| Does a collective bargaining exemption under §50-123(A) control the need for a board of review when a CBA exists? | Stone argues CBA exemption does not apply to probationary trainees. | Jenks asserts exemption due to CBA with permanent officers. | Yes; exemption applies, so no board of review required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burk v. K-Mart Corp., 770 P.2d 24 (Okla. 1989) (at-will employment doctrine preserved; public policy limits exist as Burk tort)
- Fraternal Order of Police, Lodge 108 v. City of Ardmore, 44 P.3d 569 (Okla. 2002) (probationary trainees and union rights analyzed in OPPRS context)
- City of Durant v. Cicio, 50 P.3d 218 (Okla. 2002) (distinguished; permanent officer vs. trainee rights under §50-123)
- Rogers v. QuikTrip Corp., 261 P.3d 1143 (Okla. 2011) (statutory construction principles; legislative intent guidance)
- Lumber 2, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., 261 P.3d 1143 (Okla. 2011) (statutory interpretation framework and reconciliation of provisions)
- Zaloudek Grain Co. v. Compsource Oklahoma, 298 P.3d 520 (Okla. 2012) (statutory construction and reading terms consistently)