Civil Service and Joint Labor/Union Boards provide an efficient alternative for employment grievances.

Employment related practices (EPL) claims are among the largest and most catastrophic claims facing public entities today. Verdicts can be virtually unlimited due to the fact that most claims can be filed as Federal, Section 1983 claims, effectively eliminating any state tort statutes. Due to the severe nature of these claims, Global Intermediaries is always searching for new and unique ways to manage them. We regularly interview and research the techniques of public entities around the U.S. in the hopes of finding a way to eventually eliminate (or at least greatly reduce) EPL claims altogether. On a recent business trip we may have uncovered a useful technique for all entities when it comes to handling EPL grievances before they reach the claim stage.

EPL related claims can be sleepers in the world of insurance. One day everything is running smoothly and the next you’re looking at possible losses in the millions! Along with their financial impact, EPL claims are very time intensive; multiple departments are involved, HR, attorneys… sooner or later the whole entity is involved in one way or another.

On a recent business trip I visited a public entity who utilizes a bipartisan Civil Service (or Joint Labor/Union) Board to review EPL grievances. It appeared that this neutral board has allowed the public entity to save both time and money in the management of their EPL related claims. If Civil Service Boards work for this public entity, why aren’t others using them? Could a neutral board, combined with a technique called “intent based focus” (forged out of the collective bargaining world) represent the next wave in loss control for the public entity world

I’ve just started my research, but I’ve uncovered a lot of the grievance process commonalities among public entities. Most public entities utilize a tested, but money and time consuming method:

• An employee contacts their attorney or union representative and has them file a complaint with the HR department.
• HR receives the complaint, reviews, and then contacts their attorney… From here, the battle is on.
• Some of the grievances end up in lawsuits, which add even more cost to the already laborious process.

In my interviews with public entities that use bipartisan boards, I’ve found that the grievance process is managed much differently.

• Employees are required to bring their grievance up in front of a board compiled of their peers and others from their employer.
• The board then looks at a broad view of the issue at hand, making sure that the employee’s full voice is heard and understood.
• This process can quell any wrongdoings by the entity, overturn bad employment decisions by managers, and it can dissolve any misunderstandings by the employee filing the grievance.
• Overall, the process serves as a neutral step that must be done before anything further takes place. It appears that most grievances can be quickly solved with this process, although some still end up in court.

Over the next month I’ll be continuing to research Civil Service (Joint Labor/Union) Boards to find some concrete answers and to discover their true power. I’ll also be including an in depth look on two related claims and how they were handled. One case involves a new Sheriff who fired most of the old senior staff, resulting in $10MM in lawsuits. The other situation involves a bus driver union that caused tensions for over two years before a bipartisan board was implemented.

Overall, it is my goal to help provide you with new information to help control costs and solve problems well before any insurance company is put on notice. If my theories and research pans out, a Civil Service Board might be one of those items!