When the State Employment Relations Board issues an unfair labor practice decision, the case doesn't always end there. Ohio law provides a clear path for judicial review of SERB orders, but successfully navigating this appeal process requires understanding strict deadlines, procedural requirements, and most importantly, the different standards of review that courts will apply. For unions seeking to challenge adverse SERB decisions or defend favorable ones, mastering these appellate fundamentals can mean the difference between victory and defeat.

The Right to Appeal and Its Limitations

Ohio Revised Code Section 4117.13(D) establishes the fundamental right to appeal, allowing any party aggrieved by a final SERB order to seek judicial review. This right extends to orders that grant or deny relief in whole or in part, encompassing unfair labor practice determinations, representation case decisions appealable under O.R.C. 119.12, and even final offer settlement awards and conciliator orders made under Chapter 4117.

However, this right comes with significant constraints. The most critical limitation is timing: parties have only fifteen days from the mailing of SERB's order to file their notice of appeal. This compressed timeline leaves no room for deliberation or delay. Missing this deadline typically forecloses any opportunity for judicial review, making immediate action essential when an adverse order arrives.

Perfecting the Appeal: The Dual Filing Requirement

Successfully initiating an appeal requires more than simply filing paperwork with a court. Ohio law mandates a dual filing process that many practitioners overlook at their peril. The notice of appeal, which must clearly identify the order being appealed and the grounds for challenge, must be filed in two locations simultaneously.

First, the appeal must be filed with the appropriate court of common pleas. Jurisdiction typically lies in the county where the alleged unfair labor practice occurred, where the appellant resides or transacts business, or for public employers spanning multiple counties, where the chief executive maintains their principal office. Second, a copy must be filed with SERB at its Columbus headquarters at 65 East State Street, 12th Floor, Columbus, Ohio 43215-4213, as required by Ohio Administrative Code Rules 4117-7-07 or 4117-7-08.

Once properly filed, the court will serve notice on SERB, triggering a ten-day deadline for the Board to compile and submit a certified transcript of the entire record, including all pleadings and evidence underlying the challenged order. This complete record forms the foundation for judicial review.

Understanding the Bifurcated Standard of Review

The most strategically significant aspect of SERB appeals lies in understanding how courts review different types of challenges. Ohio law establishes a bifurcated standard that treats factual and legal issues fundamentally differently, with profound implications for appellate strategy.

Factual Findings: The Substantial Evidence Standard

When reviewing SERB's factual determinations, courts apply considerable deference. The trial court examines whether SERB's findings are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Substantial evidence means relevant, material evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. If such evidence exists, the factual findings are considered conclusive.

The deference grows even stronger on appeal from the trial court. Appellate courts review only whether the trial court abused its discretion in evaluating SERB's factual findings. This abuse of discretion standard represents an exceptionally high bar, requiring a showing that the trial court's judgment was unreasonable, arbitrary, or unconscionable.

Recent cases illustrate this deferential review in action. In City of Cleveland v. State Employment Relations Board (2024-Ohio-4787), the Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed both SERB's finding and the trial court's approval that installing dashboard cameras in EMS vehicles triggered effects bargaining obligations. The court found substantial evidence supported SERB's factual determination about the impact on working conditions, and the trial court had not abused its discretion in affirming that finding.

Legal Issues: De Novo Review

The landscape changes dramatically when challenging SERB's legal conclusions. Courts review questions of law de novo, meaning they examine legal issues fresh without any deference to SERB's interpretation. This principle extends to statutory interpretation, application of legal standards, and significantly, interpretation of collective bargaining agreements.

The Ohio Supreme Court established this framework definitively in Lorain City School District Board of Education v. State Employment Relations Board, recognizing that while agencies possess expertise in their specialized fields, the judiciary retains ultimate authority to determine what the law means. Courts are never required to defer to an agency's legal interpretations, creating opportunities for unions to challenge adverse legal rulings even when the underlying facts remain unchanged.

This de novo review proved decisive in City of Cleveland v. State Employment Relations Board (2024-Ohio-3018), where the court independently examined whether the city's unilateral decision to hire part-time employees and assign them bargaining unit work violated its duty to bargain. The court applied its own legal analysis to determine that the city had not explicitly reserved this right in the collective bargaining agreement, making the change a mandatory subject of bargaining.

Strategic Implications for Union Representatives

Understanding these different standards of review should fundamentally shape how unions approach SERB proceedings and potential appeals. At the hearing level, building a comprehensive factual record becomes paramount. Every piece of evidence, every witness examination, and every exhibit introduced creates the foundation for potential appellate review. Since courts defer heavily to SERB's factual findings when supported by substantial evidence, the opportunity to shape those findings occurs primarily at the initial hearing.

When contemplating an appeal, unions must honestly assess whether their challenge rests on factual or legal grounds. Factual challenges face an uphill battle, requiring demonstration that no reasonable mind could accept the evidence as adequate to support SERB's conclusions. Success typically requires identifying clear gaps in the evidence, contradictions in testimony that SERB overlooked, or instances where SERB's findings directly contradict uncontroverted evidence.

Legal challenges offer more promising terrain. Arguments about whether conduct constitutes an unfair labor practice, whether a subject is mandatory or permissive for bargaining, or how to interpret contract language all receive fresh examination by reviewing courts. Unions should focus appellate resources on these legal issues, marshaling statutory authority, case precedents, and policy arguments that support their interpretation of the law.

The distinction between challenging decisions versus effects also merits careful consideration. As demonstrated in the Cleveland dashboard camera case, employers may have discretion to make certain operational decisions, but still face mandatory bargaining obligations regarding the effects on employees. Framing issues correctly as effects bargaining can transform a permissive subject into a mandatory one, fundamentally altering the legal landscape.

Practical Considerations During the Appeal Process

Several practical realities shape the appeal process. First, filing an appeal does not automatically stay SERB's order. Unless the court specifically grants a stay, the obligations imposed by SERB remain in effect during the appeal. This can create compliance challenges for employers ordered to cease certain practices or reinstate employees, while unions defending favorable orders can enforce them even as appeals proceed.

Courts are directed to hear SERB appeals expeditiously and, upon showing good cause, to prioritize them over other civil matters. This expedited treatment reflects the legislature's recognition that labor disputes require prompt resolution to maintain stable labor relations. However, even expedited proceedings can take months, making the absence of an automatic stay particularly significant.

Unions should also consider whether to seek admission of additional evidence not presented at the SERB hearing. While courts can order SERB to receive new evidence upon showing that it is material and that reasonable grounds existed for not presenting it initially, this avenue remains narrow. Courts typically reject attempts to introduce evidence that could have been presented originally, reinforcing the importance of comprehensive record development at the agency level.

Defending Favorable SERB Orders

When unions prevail before SERB, understanding appellate standards becomes equally important for defending those victories. The deferential review of factual findings works in favor of unions defending favorable orders. Emphasizing the substantial evidence supporting SERB's findings and highlighting the narrow scope of appellate review can help preserve victories.

On legal issues, unions must be prepared to defend SERB's interpretations independently, knowing courts will not defer to the agency's legal analysis. This requires developing comprehensive legal arguments that can stand on their own merits, independent of SERB's reasoning. Sometimes this means advancing alternative legal theories that support the same result, ensuring multiple paths to affirming the favorable order.

Conclusion: Strategic Preparation from Hearing Through Appeal

Success in the SERB appeal process begins long before any notice of appeal is filed. It starts with thorough preparation at the administrative hearing, where the factual record is created and preserved. It continues through careful analysis of SERB's order, distinguishing between factual and legal issues and honestly assessing the likelihood of success under applicable standards of review.

For unions navigating Ohio's public sector labor relations, understanding the appeal process provides both a shield and a sword. It offers a pathway to challenge adverse decisions while providing tools to defend hard-won victories. By mastering these procedural requirements and strategic considerations, unions can more effectively protect their members' rights and advance their interests through every level of the administrative and judicial process.

The fifteen-day deadline for filing appeals serves as a constant reminder that in labor law, as in labor organizing, timing and preparation determine success. Whether challenging an adverse order or defending a favorable one, unions that understand and strategically navigate the SERB appeal process position themselves for success in Ohio's complex public sector labor relations landscape.

This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case is unique, and you should consult with a Ohio Union Labor Attorney about your specific situation.