Independence-National Education Association v. Independence School District

223 S.W.3d 131 (2007)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Independence-National Education Association v. Independence School District

Missouri Supreme Court
223 S.W.3d 131 (2007)

  • Written by Mike Begovic, JD

Facts

Article I, § 29 of Missouri’s constitution guaranteed all employees the right to collectively bargain through representatives of their own choosing. Article I, § 29 did not explicitly define employees or limit the definition of employees to those in the private sector. A separate public-sector labor law protected this right for public-sector employees, but it explicitly excluded teachers. It was common practice for three different public-employee unions (the unions) (plaintiffs) to meet with the school board (the board), which represented the school district (defendant), in order to discuss and agree on proposals for the employment relationship, including details such as working conditions and salaries. The agreements were outlined in official memorandums of understanding, as required by public-sector labor law. Teachers also engaged in this practice with the district. In 2002 the board had official memorandums in effect with all of the unions. The board also had a discussion procedure in place with the teachers’ union. Despite this, the board unilaterally adopted a collaborative team policy (the policy) without meeting with the unions. The policy changed terms of employment relating to grievances, payroll, employee discipline, and dismissal. The policy also rescinded the discussion procedure. The unions sued, contending that the board’s refusal to engage in collective bargaining violated the Missouri constitution. The unions also contended that the board could not unilaterally rescind the agreements in place. The trial court ruled against the unions, who filed an appeal to the Missouri Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Wolff, C.J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Price, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership