Brandon concentrates his law practice in representing and advising cities in the areas of public labor and employment law and human resources. He also practices in the areas of municipal law and administrative law. To learn more about Brandon’s practice areas and experience, view his full bio page.

“We welcome Brandon as our newest shareholder.  Brandon is an excellent attorney with a strong dedication to the interests of his municipal clients.  In his time with Flaherty & Hood, Brandon has helped the firm build a truly outstanding public labor and employment law practice to serve our clients,” said Chris Hood, Vice President and managing shareholder of the firm’s legal practice.

 Feel free to contact Brandon for any of your legal needs by email at bmfitzsimmons@flaherty-hood.com or phone at 651-259-1910.

In the initial maps proposed by the legislature, several cities were split into two or more legislative districts.  Other cities were placed in long narrow districts shared by very different communities located hours away.  The proposed congressional maps also split the state into districts that ran from the western boundary to the eastern boundary.

Although the legislature still could pass another map in January, it would still need approval from the governor.   Thus, the maps being created by the Judicial Panel on Redistricting are likely to be the final maps.  Past judicial panels have relied on oral and written testimony from cities and citizens.  You can help your community by providing written comments before 5:00 PM on October 21, 2011.

Start by looking at the initial legislative maps here and congressional maps here.  The interactive map in the bottom right hand corner will identify which proposed district your city would be located in.  The pull down maps provide detail about the individual districts.

Redistricting is not simply plugging numbers into a computer program.  Written comments should include what cities, towns, and other communities of interest make sense to group together and where lines should be drawn if a city must be split.

E-mail statements to StateRedistrictingPanel@courts.state.mn.us or send one original and one copy of the statement via U.S. mail to: Minnesota Special Redistricting Panel, c/o Bridget Gernander, Clerk of Appellate Courts, 305 Minnesota Judicial Center, 25 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, St Paul, MN 55155.

Flaherty & Hood represents MARP at the legislature and the Department of Labor and Industry.

To date, the preliminary requests total $2.256 billion: $1.757 billion from state agencies and $499 million from local governments.  Governor Dayton will submit his Strategic Capital Budget to the Legislature on January 15, 2012.  Not all projects will get funded so it is important to make your project stand out.

• Jobs and economic development: Provide information on the jobs retained or created for your project. While it can be hard to quantify, legislators want to know the estimated number of short-term and long-term jobs that will be created.  Another important piece of information is the economic impact to the area.  What is the annual economic benefit of the project? Will it bring out of state dollars to the area?
• Community support and partnerships: Show how a wide array of stakeholders in your community support the project.  This includes area legislators, city councils, county officials, local businesses, educational institutions, associations, coalitions or other community groups.
• Start early and stay connected: It is not too early to contact the Governor’s office and the House and Senate Capital Investment Committees.   Share with committee members, chairs and the governor’s bonding staff what makes your project significant to the state or region.  Remember to include jobs and economic impact figures.

Flaherty & Hood legislative and communications staff will help your project advance at each and every level.

In order to be binding, a practice must be: 1) clear, 2) consistently done in the past, 3) mutually accepted by both the employer and the union, 4) not contrary to clear and unambiguous language in the CBA, and 5) a major term or condition of employment. If one or more of these elements are not present, then a past practice is likely not binding on the employer nor the union. In that case, an employer may unilaterally change or refuse to follow such practice. If all of these elements are present and the employer desires to eliminate or change the practice, then the employer may only do so under certain circumstances.

Generally, an employer may change or eliminate a past practice without getting agreement from the union by doing one of the following:

• Providing notice to the union employees before the expiration of a CBA of its intent to change the practice following the expiration of the existing CBA;
• Changing the practice because the underlying basis for the practice has changed or been eliminated; or
• Denying a demand by the union to incorporate language on the practice into the CBA during negotiations for a new CBA.

An employer’s authority to change or eliminate a past practice is bolstered if the CBA contains “Zipper” and “Waiver” clauses, which basically provide that the CBA contains all terms and conditions of employment, any matters not addressed in the CBA are in the authority of management to establish, eliminate or modify and the parties waive the right to negotiate over any matter not addressed in the CBA.

A past practice may always be changed or eliminated if the employer and union agree in writing to change or eliminate the practice.

Employers should be aware that determining whether a practice is binding and whether an employer effectively changes or eliminates a binding past practice is based on the circumstances of a specific case and employers should therefore consult legal counsel regarding these issues.

For more information on this issue, contact Brandon Fitzsimmons.