Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Relations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board finds no unlawful acts after hearing on polling dispute between teachers’ groups
Summary
MSCEA alleged the district or rival UEA improperly influenced a collaborative‑conferencing poll. After presentations by both associations’ lawyers and questions from commissioners, the board declined to find unlawful conduct by either UEA or the board.
The Shelby County Board of Education on Tuesday heard a formal grievance from the Memphis Shelby County Education Association (MSCEA) alleging improper conduct during a district poll to determine whether teachers would pursue collaborative conferencing and which organization would represent them.
MSCEA’s counsel, Daryl O’Neil, told the board the poll showed multiple irregularities — most notably that a cover email accompanying the electronic ballot listed the president of the United Education Association (UEA) as the point of contact. “There is no explanation of how her name got on that ballot,” O’Neil said, adding the images his team provided show union representatives inside school hallways while classes were in session.
UEA counsel Rick Colbert responded that the association’s president did not initiate any calls about the ballot and provided a signed declaration from UEA leadership saying she received no ballot‑related calls on the listed number. He also said the poll was administered following the standard special‑question committee process and that listing UEA’s state and national affiliations (TEA/NEA) on the ballot was proper.
After remarks from both sides, board members questioned the evidence. Several commissioners said the written submissions and declarations were the record, and no direct proof that the board directed VoteNet (the vendor) to add a UEA contact had been shown.
The board then voted on two questions presented at the hearing: whether UEA committed an unlawful act under the collaborative‑conferencing statute, and whether the board committed an unlawful act. On both questions the board did not find unlawful conduct. The initial vote on whether UEA acted unlawfully failed (6 nays, 1 present not voting, others recorded as no), and a subsequent separate vote found no unlawful act by the board (unanimous no votes recorded in roll call where applicable).
General counsel had instructed the board the statute lists a narrow set of unlawful acts, taken in part from federal labor law, including employer domination of an employee organization. The board noted parties had ample opportunity to submit documents and appear with counsel; commissioners said if the associations wanted to pursue the matter further they could litigate in Chancery Court.
The hearing concluded with no changes ordered by the board; both associations and the district are free to pursue any next steps under the law.
