197 Ohio App. 3d 108
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Lucki, a corrections officer at North Central Correctional Institution, alleges DRC failed to pay overtime under R.C. 4111.03(A).
- The position is within a bargaining unit represented by OCSEA/AFSCME Local 11, AFL-CIO.
- Lucki filed a second amended class-action alleging post-shift work paid at less than 1.5x overtime rate, with ten-minute post-shift requirements or discipline.
- DRC moved to dismiss under R.C. 4117.10(A), asserting the CBA and grievance/arbitration procedures deprive Court of Claims of jurisdiction.
- The Court of Claims granted dismissal, holding arbitration under the CBA preempts the wage-and-hour claim.
- Lucki appeals, arguing no CBA provision expressly excludes overtime for post-shift work.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Court of Claims lack jurisdiction under 4117.10(A)? | No express exclusion in the CBA; 4117.10(A) not triggered. | CBA governs; arbitration precludes Court of Claims. | Yes; Court of Claims lacks jurisdiction; arbitration governs. |
| Do Batavia/Tempesta overrule Null regarding wage-and-hour preemption? | Batavia implicitly overruled Null to preempt statutory rights. | Batavia/Tempesta do not modify Null on wage claims. | Batavia/Tempesta do not overrule Null; Null controls here. |
| Does R.C. 4117.10(A) preempt R.C. 4111.03(A) when the CBA lacks explicit exclusion? | No explicit exclusion means state law applies; 4117.10(A) not triggered. | If the CBA addresses the matter or includes arbitration, 4117.10(A) predominate. | No explicit exclusion; 4117.10(A) does not prevent preemption by the CBA. |
| Are the overtime provisions in 4111.03(A) and the CBA in conflict such that the CBA prevails? | No conflict because CBA lacks specific post-shift overtime terms. | Conflict exists; CBA governs overtime via arbitration. | Conflict exists; the CBA prevails absent enumerated exceptions. |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Ohio Assn. of Pub. School Employees v. Batavia Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 89 Ohio St.3d 191 (2000) (preemption requires explicit language to negate statutory rights)
- Null v. Ohio Dept. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities, 137 Ohio App.3d 152 (2000) (bargaining agreement controls overtime if no conflict with statute)
- State ex rel. Tempesta v. Warren, 128 Ohio St.3d 463 (2011) (confirms Batavia approach to statutory rights vs. agreement provisions)
- Streetsboro Edn. Assn. v. Streetsboro City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn., 68 Ohio St.3d 288 (1994) (4117.10(A) framework: agreement prevails only when specific)