Village of Oxford v. Jamie Lovely
331002
| Mich. Ct. App. | Apr 13, 2017Background
- Jamie Lovely (employee) was on long-term disability leave under the AFSCME CBA; he retained seniority while on LTD and was eligible for reemployment if recovered and a vacancy existed.
- The Village of Oxford eliminated a Laborer I position in 2012; Lovely remained on leave and later sought reinstatement after medical releases in July 2013 (with restrictions) and January 2014 (without restrictions).
- The union filed grievances asserting violations of the CBA (citing Article XVIII/Leaves of Absence); the Village denied reinstatement, citing the position’s elimination.
- Arbitrator conducted a hearing and issued an award (Jan 28, 2015) holding Lovely’s seniority continued and that the Village could not eliminate his position while less-senior employees remained in identical positions; she ordered reinstatement in part.
- The Village filed in circuit court to vacate the award, arguing the arbitrator exceeded her powers by deciding issues beyond the specific Article/Section cited in the grievances; the trial court confirmed the award.
- Court of Appeals affirmed, holding the arbitrator acted within the CBA-granted jurisdiction and powers; plaintiff’s challenge to scope of arbitration failed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the arbitrator exceeded her powers by deciding violations beyond the specific Article/Section cited in the grievances | The arbitrator exceeded authority by addressing and enforcing provisions of the CBA not specifically identified in the filed grievances | The grievances "involved" the cited Article/Section and the CBA (and parties’ pleadings) permitted consideration of interacting provisions; arbitrator had authority to decide whether the employer violated the CBA as a whole | Affirmed: arbitrator acted within her jurisdiction and powers under the CBA; court will not vacate the award for the claimed overreach |
Key Cases Cited
- Saveski v. Tiseo Architects, Inc., 261 Mich App 553 (review of arbitration awards; vacatur only for legal error apparent on face of award)
- DAIEE v. Gavin, 416 Mich 407 (arbitrators exceed powers when acting beyond contract terms or contrary to controlling law)
- Wilkie v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., 469 Mich 41 (contracts must be read as a whole for interpretation)
- Port Huron Area School Dist. v. Port Huron Ed. Ass’n, 426 Mich 143 (arbitrator lacks authority when contract expressly forbids consideration of a provision)
- Huntington Woods v. Ajax Paving Indus., Inc., 196 Mich App 71 (arbitrability and scope questions)