How
are WERC case assignments made?
As a service organization, WERC attempts to assign its cases in a manner that simultaneously pursues the dual objectives of quality service to the parties and efficiency of operations for the agency and the taxpayers.
The agency Chair assigns cases after they have been made up into case files. The files consist of newly opened files, complaint cases that have been unsuccessfully conciliated or in which a prompt hearing has been requested, and other files returned to the Chair for reassignment for one reason or another.
Each case file has included with it a list of all pending cases involving the employer, showing the labor organization involved as well as the staff member assigned to each of those cases. That information helps the Chair avoid assigning cases which would put the staff member or the parties in an awkward position as indicated by some of the factors noted below.
Cases are generally assigned about once a week, when enough cases have accumulated to permit grouping them for economies of travel.
In addition to the list of pending cases involving the same employer, the Chair has available a caseload report summarizing each staff member's active cases, broken into the following categories: complaint cases, representation cases, personnel appeals, first contract mediations, cases heard but not ready for decision, cases ready for decision, cases where decisions are overdue, and number of separate calendar entries. That data is used to try to equitably apportion the work load according to the criteria noted below.
In mediation and grievance arbitration cases, the agency makes an effort to honor requests made jointly by both parties for a particular staff person or for one of multiple specified staff persons. However, the agency does not honor unilateral requests for or against a particular staff. The agency will also make an effort to find a staff member available to serve the parties on a date or dates on which the parties have jointly agreed and/or to provide a staff member who is able and willing to provide expedited hearing and decision services jointly requested by the parties. While the agency will try to honor joint requests that multiple grievances be handled by the same staff member or by separate staff members, this may not always be possible under the current circumstances of reduced staff. Unilateral requests are less likely to be honored in those regards. Where parties have a large number of grievance arbitration requests filed at or about the same time, one staff member may be assigned to attempt to arrange grievance mediation before the cases are assigned to staff arbitrators.
If a case appears to be unusually difficult, it will be assigned to a staff member who is considered capable of handling the case successfully.
The other criteria utilized in assigning the cases are as follows:
Ordinarily staff are not assigned to adversarial cases (e.g., grievance arbitration or prohibited practice) involving a bargaining unit that they are mediating, or, conversely, to mediate with parties with whom the staff member has a pending adversarial proceeding.
Complaint conciliators are never assigned as hearing examiner with respect to the complaint they were/are conciliating.
Ordinarily staff are not assigned to cases with parties or advocates at whose request they have recused themselves in similar cases in the past or with whom they would have a known conflict of interest or with whom they have had a problem dealing in a previous case or cases.
The agency has six staff members stationed at locations other than
The needs and requests of staff members are given consideration along with other factors.
The agency will try to limit assigning cases that will require a written decision to staff members who already have a disproportionate or overdue writing load.
The agency will assign complaint cases with 40 day hearing requests or that otherwise appear to require prompt attention to staff who are more likely to be able to provide an early hearing date.
The agency will try to avoid assigning cases that require prompt decision making (cases where employees have lost their jobs, cases holding up bargaining, etc.) to staff who are more likely to be able to give them prompt attention.
In general, the agency attempts to assign cases to individuals who have the fewest active pending cases.
Sometimes cases are reassigned after initial assignment, if the foregoing factors come into play or if requested for valid reasons by staff member or parties.
Further information about the case assignment process in general or about the status of a particular case assignment can be directed to the agency’s Office Manager/Supervisor Georgann Kramer.
[services and personnel] [statutes, rules and ethics codes] [case processing forms and guides] [case databases and digests] [news and publications] [links to other resources] [about this site]
This page is a public domain communication of
the Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission. The URL of this page is
{http://werc.wi.gov/werc_case_assignment_methods.htm}. Last modified on 12 JAN
2005. Comments, questions and suggestions.