Connecticut Statutes
§ 7-470 — Prohibited acts of employers and employee organizations.
Connecticut § 7-470
This text of Connecticut § 7-470 (Prohibited acts of employers and employee organizations.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-470 (2026).
Text
(a)Municipal employers or their representatives or agents are prohibited from:
(1)Interfering, restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7-468;
(2)dominating or interfering with the formation, existence or administration of any employee organization;
(3)discharging or otherwise discriminating against an employee because he has signed or filed any affidavit, petition or complaint or given any information or testimony under sections 7-467 to 7-477, inclusive;
(4)refusing to bargain collectively in good faith with an employee organization which has been designated in accordance with the provisions of said sections as the exclusive representative of employees in an appropriate unit;
(5)refusing to discuss grievances with the representatives of
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Barton v. City of Bristol
294 F. Supp. 2d 184 (D. Connecticut, 2003)
North Haven Fireftrs. v. T., N. Haven, No. Cv 99 042 99 45 S (Oct. 20, 1999)
1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 13916 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1999)
Town of Colchester v. St. Bd. of Lab. R., No. Cv 99 0498496s (Sep. 7, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 10971 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
City of Groton v. Board of Labor Rel., No. Cv 94 010 47 42 (Mar. 12, 1997)
1997 Conn. Super. Ct. 3420 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1997)
Connecticut Ilu v. Hamden, No. Cv-436939 (Jun. 30, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 7929 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
Lucas v. Milford Police Union, No. Cv99 0068796s (Feb. 13, 2001)
2001 Conn. Super. Ct. 2306 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2001)
International Assn., F. F. v. Bridgeport, No. Cv 95321570s (May 12, 1995)
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 5259 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
Legislative History
(February, 1965, P.A. 159, S. 4; P.A. 75-189, S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-426, S. 5.) History: P.A. 75-189 amended Subsecs. (a) and (b) to prohibit refusing to comply terms of settlements, awards and decisions; P.A. 93-426 inserted new Subsec. (b)(3) to prohibit an employee organization which represents municipal employees from breaching its duty of fair representation to its members and redesignated existing Subdiv. (3) as (4). Cited. 154 C. 530. Plaintiff union's appeal from defendant labor relations board properly dismissed by Superior Court where there was no evidence that municipality engaged in unfair labor practices claimed in union's complaint. 159 C. 46. Cited. 171 C. 345, 349; Id., 347, 564; 175 C. 349. Standing to test constitutionality of binding arbitration provisions of Municipal Employees Relations Act discussed. 181 C. 421. Cited. 182 C. 93; 185 C. 88; 196 C. 192; 200 C. 38; 201 C. 577; 204 C. 746; 205 C. 116; 210 C. 549; 212 C. 294; 215 C. 14; 221 C. 244; 225 C. 297; 234 C. 123. Cited. 3 CA 1; 16 CA 232; 33 CA 541. A public announcement of plaintiff's intention to file a prohibited practice complaint against a union is protected by the Municipal Employees Relations Act when the complaint is actually filed at a later date. 31 CS 7. The clause in a contract between a municipality and its firemen which gives the firemen parity with police is a restraint upon and interference with the police union's ability to negotiate with the municipality. Id., 15, 22. Residency requirement for municipal employees was condition of employment and therefore a mandatory subject of collective bargaining, and employer's unilateral change of such condition of employment was prohibited act; failure of union to demand bargaining prior to enactment of ordinance did not constitute a waiver of its right to bargain. 36 CS 18. Cited. 40 CS 365; 42 CS 227; 43 CS 340; Id., 470. Subsec. (a): Subdiv. (1): Labor board cannot compel either party, directly or indirectly, to agree to any contractual position but can require that employees bargain in good faith. 160 C. 285. Cited. 171 C. 349. Subdiv. (4): Unilateral change of pension benefits by employer did not constitute refusal to bargain where union had notice of change and opportunity to negotiate the issue. 173 C. 210. Cited. 206 C. 449; 210 C. 597; 217 C. 110; 232 C. 57. Term “grievance settlement” within Subdiv. (6) encompasses an unappealed grievance decision; State Board of Labor Relations' time-tested interpretation of term is reasonable and consistent with its use as a term of art in the labor law context, there was no merit to argument that legislature intended to make a distinction between grievance decision and grievance settlement and there was nothing in statutory language or legislative history that contravened board's interpretation. 259 C. 251. Cited. 8 CA 57. Substantial evidence supported denial by State Board of Labor Relations of union's complaint alleging that supervisory personnel employed by city department of public works engaged in prohibited conduct. 156 CA 79. Cited. 39 CS 338. Subsec. (c): Collective bargaining must be taken at reasonable time relative to town's budget-making process. 160 C. 285. Cited. 162 C. 579; 171 C. 352, 353. “Conditions of employment” includes whether person shall continue in employment. Id., 553, 559, 560. Cited. 210 C. 597; 216 C. 253; 224 C. 666; 232 C. 57.
Nearby Sections
15
§ 7-10
Oath.§ 7-101
Town seal.§ 7-102
Signposts.§ 7-105a
Office of grand juror abolished.§ 7-106
Oath of grand jurors.Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Connecticut § 7-470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ct/7-470.