City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31

District Court of Appeal of Florida

City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31

543 So. 2d 320, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1103, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2485, 1989 WL 46230

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 1989

DocketNo. 88-1520

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 543 So. 2d 320 (City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31, 543 So. 2d 320, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1103, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2485, 1989 WL 46230 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The City of Ft. Lauderdale (City) appeals an order of the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) which found that the City did not commit an unfair labor practice by unilaterally revising § 21 of its rales and regulations book to prohibit uniformed police personnel from wearing beards. The Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31 (FOP) cross-appeals the same order. We dismiss the City’s appeal and affirm PERC’s order on cross-appeal.

The City contends that PERC misinterpreted Florida’s statutory management rights clause, § 447.209, Fla.Stat. The City is in effect asking this court for an advisory opinion on an issue not ruled upon by the hearing officer and found to be immaterial to the disposition of the case by PERC. The City also contends PERC properly concluded that the FOP waived any right it may have had to bargain concerning the “no beards rule” and that the unfair labor practice charge against it was properly dismissed. The City prevailed on this issue and it cannot appeal an order on an issue on which it prevailed before PERC. We therefore dismiss the City’s appeal.

On cross-appeal FOP contends that PERC departed from the essential requirements of law in finding that it waived bargaining by, contract under Article 50, § 4 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. There was no departure from the essential requirements of law and there is ample competent substantial evidence to support PERC’s finding that FOP waived any right it may have had to bargain concerning the “no beards rule.” PERC’s order is therefore AFFIRMED.

WENTWORTH, THOMPSON and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The City of Ft. Lauderdale (City) appeals an order of the Public Employees Relations Commission (PERC) which found that the City did not commit an unfair labor practice by unilaterally revising § 21 of its rales and regulations book to prohibit uniformed police personnel from wearing beards. The Fraternal Order of Police, Ft. Lauderdale, Lodge 31 (FOP) cross-appeals the same order. We dismiss the City’s appeal and affirm PERC’s order on cross-appeal.

The City contends that PERC misinterpreted Florida’s statutory management rights clause, § 447.209, Fla.Stat. The City is in effect asking this court for an advisory opinion on an issue not ruled upon by the hearing officer and found to be immaterial to the disposition of the case by PERC. The City also contends PERC properly concluded that the FOP waived any right it may have had to bargain concerning the “no beards rule” and that the unfair labor practice charge against it was properly dismissed. The City prevailed on this issue and it cannot appeal an order on an issue on which it prevailed before PERC. We therefore dismiss the City’s appeal.

On cross-appeal FOP contends that PERC departed from the essential requirements of law in finding that it waived bargaining by, contract under Article 50, § 4 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. There was no departure from the essential requirements of law and there is ample competent substantial evidence to support PERC’s finding that FOP waived any right it may have had to bargain concerning the “no beards rule.” PERC’s order is therefore AFFIRMED.

WENTWORTH, THOMPSON and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

543 So. 2d 320, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1103, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2485, 1989 WL 46230, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-ft-lauderdale-v-fraternal-order-of-police-ft-lauderdale-lodge-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack