FRATERNAL
ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE NO. 12, APPELLEE
AND
CROSS-APPELLANT
v.
205
Filed
March 11, 1980, No. 42549
1. Commission of Industrial Relations: Appeal
and Error. A party appealing from an order of the Commission of Industrial
Relations is not required to file a motion for a new trial before the commission
as a prerequisite to an appeal.
2. Commission of Industrial Relations:
Evidence: Appeal and Error. In reviewing the findings and orders of the
Commission of Industrial Relations we are restricted to considering whether the
order of the commission is supported by substantial evidence justifying the
same, whether the commission acted within the scope of its statutory authority,
and whether its action was arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
Appeal from the Commission of Industrial
Relations. Affirmed.
Nelson & Harding, A. Stevenson Bogue, and
William A. Harding, for appellant.
Les Seiler, for appellee.
Heard before KRIVOSHA, C. J., BOSLAUGH,
MCCOWN, CLINTON, BRODKEY, WHITE, and HASTINGS, JJ.
HASTINGS, J.
The
A petition was
filed by the Lodge on August 22, 1978, alleging that an industrial dispute
existed by reason of the refusal of the County to bargain concerning the items
set forth above. A hearing was had and evidence consisted of testimony of Greg
McGee, acting sheriff, Billy Simmons, a deputy sheriff, and Hugh Catherwood, a
consultant in the field of personnel relations, as well as considerable
statistical data.
The County's
nine assigned errors may be consolidated into two general categories --
rejection or acceptance of certain items of evidence, and awarding financial
benefits to the employees, claiming that the total compensation previously
received was comparable to the prevalent.
At the outset
we dispose of the Lodge's contention that the appeal be dismissed because of the
failure of the County to file a motion for a new trial. This is disposed of by
our holding in Plattsmouth Pol. Dept. Coll. Barg. Comm. v. City of Plattsmouth,
ante p. 567, 288 N. W. 2d 729 (1980), that a party appealing from an order of
the Commission of Industrial Relations is not required to file a motion for a
new trial before the commission as a prerequisite to an appeal. There is no
merit to the Lodge's contention.
Beyond that
preliminary statement, we will state that in reviewing the findings and orders
of the Commission of Industrial Relations we are restricted to considering
whether the order of the commission is supported by substantial evidence
justifying the same, whether the commission acted within the scope of its
statutory authority, and whether its action was arbitrary, capricious, or
unreasonable. We affirm the action of the CIR.
The witness
McGee testified as to the general duties of the various categories of employees
and the average amount of overtime put in by each category.
Deputy Simmons
testified that the average cost to him for the cleaning of his uniforms amounted
to $29.75 per month and in addition to that he had to provide his own shoes and
weapons. Also, having served in the past as a member of the
Both parties
introduced statistical data which consisted of an array comprised of Hall,
Dodge,
After
reviewing in some detail the various wages paid
Additionally,
the CIR found that compensatory time, rather than time and one-half, was the
prevalent practice and which neither party desired; that there is no prevalent
practice of paying double time for holidays; that the vacation benefits were
comparable to the prevalent practice; that sick leave accumulation is similar to
that of the array; and that the evidence does not support the presence of
"tenure" for employees in any part of the array. As to medical
insurance, although the County paid slightly more, $1 to $5 for employee
coverage, the amount allocated to family benefits was approximately $3 as
compared to from $28 to $72 in the array. Uniform allowances ranged from $15 to
$40 in the array as opposed to nothing provided by the County. Accordingly, the
CIR ordered the County to pay a clothing allowance of $25 per month and family
medical insurance coverage benefits of $42.11 per month, up $39 from the
previous $3.11.
It was
implicit in the order of the CIR, and as a matter of fact specifically so found,
that all wages and benefits paid by the County were comparable to the prevalent
except for the insurance benefits and clothing allowances. We hold that these
findings and the order predicated on the same were supported by substantial
evidence justifying the same, were based on actions of the CIR well within the
scope of its statutory authority, and were neither arbitrary, capricious, nor
unreasonable.
Accordingly,
we affirm the order of the Commission of Industrial Relations.
AFFIRMED.