Waterloo Education Ass'n v. Iowa Public Employment Relations

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “whether a proposal is a mandatory subject of collective bargaining, as defined by Iowa Code section 20.9, has not been explicitly vested in PERB’s discretion”
• holding “whether a proposal is a mandatory subject of collective bargaining, as defined by Iowa Code section 20.9, has not been explicitly vested in PERB’s discretion”
• describing the question of whether a proposal is illegal as the second prong of the analysis
• describing the question of whether a proposal is illegal as the second prong of the analysis
• limiting the use of a balancing test to those situations in which a proposed bargaining topic cannot be categorized according to a specific term listed in section 20.9 of PERA
• limiting the use of a balancing test to those situations in which a proposed bargaining topic cannot be categorized according to a specific term listed in section 20.9 of PERA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).