The instant case and the Dubuque County and Scott County decisions are
analogous because all three cases concern the obligation of elected county
office holders to abide by the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining
agreement covering bargaining unit employees in their respective offices or
departments.
With respect to this case, the Lyon County Sheriff is an elected County
official. Additionally, the County and the Union negotiated a collective
bargaining agreement covering the wages, hours, and working conditions for
certain sheriff's department employees, including deputy sheriffs. The labor
agreement covers the period July 1, 1981 to June 30, 1982. Applying these
facts to the conclusions reached in Dubuque County and Scott County, it is
clear that these decisions are controlling. Specifically, any elected county
official does not have the authority to override or otherwise amend a labor
agreement negotiated between a public employer and a certified employee
organization. Therefore, the answer to the question presented by the parties
is, no.
In view of the fact that the parties agreed not to present evidence on
the prohibited practice complaint and the fact that, in an effort to mutually
resolve the complaint the parties stipulated to the appropriate remedy,
it is my considered opinion that the parties do not intend the Undersigned
to determine whether the County violated Board Rule 6.4(20).
Based upon the foregoing, I issue the following:
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties, or their representatives, meet
within ten days of the date below for the purpose of implementing the follow-
wing stipulated remedy:
-6-
