Town of Johnston v. Rhode Island Council 94, Local 1491 Ex Rel. Prata
159 A.3d 83
| R.I. | 2017Background
- Colleen Crowley was appointed Clerk I by the Johnston Board of Canvassers in 2005, later promoted to Clerk II, paid union dues, and listed on the town seniority roster.
- In 2014 the board unanimously eliminated Crowley’s position due to budget cuts; the union sought to invoke her contractual "bumping" rights under the CBA.
- The town refused, asserting Crowley was not a town employee covered by the CBA because she was appointed by the board under § 17-8-5 rather than by the town administration.
- The union filed grievances per the CBA and, after exhausting procedures, demanded arbitration; the arbitrator bifurcated arbitrability and held Crowley was a bargaining-unit employee and the dispute was arbitrable.
- The Superior Court denied the town’s petition to vacate or stay the award and confirmed the arbitration award; the town appealed to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Crowley’s grievance was arbitrable | Town: matters involving statutory appointment and scope of board authority are not for arbitration; Crowley not covered by CBA | Union: Crowley was treated as a municipal employee (dues, seniority, listed clerical classifications in CBA) and thus her grievance is arbitrable | Arbitrable: Court held Crowley is a municipal employee under the CBA and her grievance is arbitrable |
| Whether the arbitrator exceeded authority by interpreting statutes | Town: arbitrator improperly interpreted statutory scheme and allowed CBA to supersede statute | Union: arbitrator’s interpretation drew from contract and applicable statutes and did not conflict with board authority | No excess: Court found no conflict between statute and CBA and no basis to vacate award |
| Whether CBA can override state law or statutory policy | Town: CBA cannot supersede statute or alter statutory appointment powers | Union: CBA governs grievance/arbitration rights for municipal employees as defined by statute | CBA permissible: Court held arbitration of grievance doesn’t infringe board’s appointment power and does not override statute |
| Standard for confirming arbitrator’s contract interpretation | Town: arbitrator’s view not passably plausible; Superior Court should have vacated award | Union: arbitrator’s interpretation need only be plausibly based on the contract | Confirmed: Court applied the limited review standard and upheld award as drawing its essence from the contract |
Key Cases Cited
- AVCORR Management, LLC v. Central Falls Detention Facility Corp., 41 A.3d 1007 (R.I. 2012) (arbitrability is reviewed de novo and turns on parties’ contract intent)
- Radiation Oncology Associates, Inc. v. Roger Williams Hospital, 899 A.2d 511 (R.I. 2006) (arbitration is a matter of contract; contract-construction rules apply)
- City of Cranston v. Int’l Brotherhood of Police Officers, Local 301, 115 A.3d 971 (R.I. 2015) (grounds for vacating an award include deciding a nonarbitrable matter)
- State Dep’t of Corr. v. Rhode Island Brotherhood of Correctional Officers, 866 A.3d 1241 (R.I. 2005) (arbitrability standard and limits on judicial vacatur of awards)
- State Dep’t of Corr. v. Rhode Island Brotherhood of Correctional Officers, 64 A.3d 734 (R.I. 2013) (arbitrator exceeds power if resolving nonarbitrable issues)
- Rhode Island Brotherhood of Correctional Officers v. State Dep’t of Corr., 707 A.2d 1229 (R.I. 1998) (concerns about arbitrators altering statutory policies in public employment contexts)