Remote Work Appeal Heads to Supreme Court, Grievances to Personnel Board

When the Commission of Industrial Relations (CIR) ruled against our union regarding the right to negotiate changes to the terms and conditions of remote work assignments, union members appealed the decision to the Nebraska Supreme Court. The purpose of the appeal is two fold. 

First, our appeal seeks to gain clarity from the state’s high court regarding two important issues. One is whether or not broad management rights cover this specific topic and if not, are negotiations required under the law? Two is whether or not our union waives its right to bargain if we withdraw a specific proposal during negotiations but the state later changes the terms and conditions of employment during the term of the contract. 

While the specific facts of the appeal deal with remote work, this case affects all of our union members and all of our rights to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment. We are proceeding with our appeal to the Supreme Court because these important legal issues affect all of our rights. Just like when the state refused to negotiate over changes to the dress code at DHHS, we fought the case to protect all of our rights to negotiate and the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled unanimously in our favor. Win or lose, this case will give us important clarity.

Second, we are appealing this case because the CIR ordered our union to pay the state’s legal fees. Our appeal was delayed because the CIR had not issued a final order regarding the amount of fees to be paid. On January 8, 2025, the CIR ordered NAPE/AFSCME to pay the State of Nebraska over $42,000 in legal fees. 

We are asking the Supreme Court to vacate the fee order. First, we do not believe the CIR has the statutory authority to order us to pay the state’s legal fees. The CIR has never before ordered a union to pay legal fees to the State of Nebraska, so this will be a case of first impression before the court. Second, the Attorney General hired outside counsel, instead of using an Assistant Attorney General to represent the State. We do not believe that we should be required to pay the fees of a private attorney. 

We are standing up for all public workers in Nebraska regarding these fees. Left unchecked, the CIR would have the ability to intimidate employees from filing cases at the CIR by threatening exorbitant legal fees if the employees do not prevail. Filing a case at the CIR is the only recourse public employees have under state law, and we must stand up to protect our right to be fairly heard.

The CIR’s final order allows the case to proceed at the Supreme Court. Our initial brief is due in April, with subsequent briefings to follow. The appeal process will likely take the majority of 2025. We will provide updates as they become available.

For those affected by the revocation of remote work assignments, members at DAS, DEE, DHHS, Natural Resources, Revenue, State Patrol, and Tourism Commission filed grievances alleging that these agencies are violating our current contract by unreasonably implementing their remote work policies. The cases were assigned to be heard by the State Personnel Board. 

The State of Nebraska has moved to dismiss all of the grievances. The Personnel Board ordered briefs to be submitted on January 24, 2025 regarding the state’s motion. We are awaiting the Board’s decision. The cases will either proceed to hearing or be dismissed by the Personnel Board. Decisions of the Personnel Board may be appealed to the District Court of Lancaster County. We will provide an update when the Personnel Board Rules on the state’s motion.

Our union is committed to protecting our member’s rights. If you need assistance, please contact help@napeafscme.org.