Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br /> The terms and conditions of the October 8, 1973 agreement, except <br /> to the extent that paragraph (9) provides for interest ' <br /> arbitration, as supplemented by the PLR.A (Illinois Public Labor <br /> Relations Act, 5 I11. Comp. Stat. 315/17) , provide protections to <br /> employees represented by the union satisfying the requirements of <br /> 49 U.S.C. , Section 5333 (b) . <br /> Rock Islaad Couaty Metropolitan Mass Traasit District � , <br /> In connection with a previous grant application, Rock Island <br /> County Metropolitan Mass Transit District (MTD) and the <br /> Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Local 313 executed an agreement <br /> dated �une 1, 1978, which incorporated by reference their entire <br /> January 13, 1975 protective agreement. The June 1, 1978 <br /> protective agreement provides to the employees represented by the <br /> union protections satisfying the requirements of 49 U.S.C. , <br /> Section 5333 (b) . The MTD and the ATU, however, remain in ', <br /> disagreement over the inclusion of paragraph (9) of the June 1, �� <br /> 1978 agreement in Department of Labor certifications. j <br /> The MTD contends that interest arbitration is not a requirement <br /> for certification of FTA projects. In addition, the MTD has <br /> stated that transit employees are afforded a dispute resolution <br /> mechanism by the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (PLR.A) , 5 <br /> I11 . Comp. Stat. 315/17 (formerly Ch. 48; Paragraph 1601 et seq. ) <br /> which meets the requirements of 49 U.S.C. , Section 5333 (b) . <br /> The ATU argues that the Illinois Circuit Court has upheld an <br /> employee protection agreement interest arbitration clause and <br /> found that under Illinois State law, such a clause remained a <br /> valid and enforceable part of an agreement to arbitrate interest <br /> disputes. See Local Division 1333 v. Rockford Mass Transit <br /> District, Case No. 84-NIIt-28 (I11. Cir. Ct. , September 17, 1984) . <br /> The Department has taken the position that, in the absence of <br /> mutual agreement by the parties, DOL would not require interest <br /> arbitration for new grants; and therefore, DOL has determined <br /> that the protective arrangement described below are fair and <br /> equitable and meet the requirements of 49 U.S.C. , Section <br /> 5333 (b) . <br />