THE OHIO ADJUTANT GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT; MAJOR GENERAL JOHN C. HARRIS, JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE ADJUTANT GENERAL OF THE OHIO NATIONAL GUARD; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE/OHIO NATIONAL GUARD v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY; AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3970, AFL-CIO - Articles

All Content

THE OHIO ADJUTANT GENERAL’S DEPARTMENT; MAJOR GENERAL JOHN C. HARRIS, JR., IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE ADJUTANT GENERAL OF THE OHIO NATIONAL GUARD; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE/OHIO NATIONAL GUARD v. FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY; AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3970, AFL-CIO

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Dec 21, 2021

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Michael J. Hendershot, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Petitioners.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Rebecca J. Osborne, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Attorneys 3: ARGUED: Matthew W. Milledge, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C., for Intervenor.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Michael J. Hendershot, Benjamin M. Flowers, Dale T. Vitale, OFFICE OF THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL, Columbus, Ohio, for Petitioners.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Rebecca J. Osborne, Noah Peters, FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Attorneys 6: ON BRIEF: Matthew W. Milledge, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, Washington, D.C., for Intervenor.

Judge(s): DAUGHTREY, COLE, and CLAY, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: On Petition for Review from the Federal Labor Relations Authority

COLE, Circuit Judge. The Ohio National Guard and its Adjutant General (collectively, the “Guard”) petition this court to review a Federal Labor Relations Authority (“FLRA”) decision and order arising out of a collective-bargaining dispute between the Guard and the union that represents its technicians, the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3970, AFL-CIO (the “Union”). The Guard seeks reversal of the decision and order, arguing that the FLRA does not have jurisdiction under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the “Statute”), 5 U.S.C. §§ 7101–7135, to adjudicate federal labor-relations questions between the Guard and the technicians’ Union. The Guard additionally argues that it is unconstitutional for the FLRA to enforce the Statute by issuing orders to state national guards and their adjutants general, and that the Guard cannot legally comply with the FLRA’s order. We deny the Guard’s petition.

Attachments: