Legal Opinion

Portland Fire Fighters Ass'n v. City of Portland

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1988No. ERB UP-143-85; CA A39106; SC S34427PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLent, J.

Neither a public employer nor its employees’ exclusive representative may refuse the other’s request to bargain collectively “with respect to employment relations.” ORS 243.650(4), 243.672(l)(e), 243.672(2)(b). 1 The issue presented is whether a public employer’s limit on the number of fire fighters who may be on vacation at the same time is an “employment relation” and therefore a matter over which the employer may not refuse to bargain. The Employment Relations Board (ERB) concluded that the limit was not an “employment relation” and, on judicial review, the Court of Appeals affirmed.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. City of Roseburg v. Roseburg City Firefighters, Local No. 1489Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Portland Firefighters Ass'n v. City of PortlandCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Salem Police Employees Union v. City of SalemOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Corpus Christi Fire Fighters Ass'n v. City of Corpus Christi, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2000
  3. Eugene Police Employees' Ass'n v. City of EugeneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  4. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Baltimore Fire FightersCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  5. Tualatin Valley Bargaining Council v. Tigard School District 23JOregon Supreme Court · 1992

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API