In Ohio public sector labor law, the difference between victory and defeat often comes down to a matter of days, sometimes hours. Missing a deadline doesn't just complicate your case; it can end it before it begins. For unions navigating the complex procedural landscape of the State Employment Relations Board, understanding and respecting these time limits isn't just good practice, it's essential to protecting your members' rights.

The 90-Day ULP Window: Your First and Most Critical Deadline

The foundation of any unfair labor practice enforcement begins with timely filing, and Ohio law provides just 90 days to act. This countdown doesn't start from when the violation occurred, but rather from when two specific conditions are met: the charging party has actual or constructive knowledge of the alleged violation, and they have suffered actual damage from the conduct.

This two-pronged test creates strategic considerations for unions. Knowledge can be constructive, meaning you should have known about the violation even if you didn't actually know. Damage must be actual, not speculative or potential. Understanding when both elements crystallize requires careful analysis, as miscalculation can be fatal to your case.

Consider a scenario where management announces a policy change in January but doesn't implement it until March. The 90-day clock likely starts in March when actual damage occurs, not January when the announcement was made. However, if the announcement itself causes immediate harm, such as chilling union organizing efforts, the clock might start earlier.

The stakes couldn't be higher. File on day 91, and SERB cannot even issue a notice of hearing. Your substantive rights vanish because of a procedural misstep. The only exception exists for military service members prevented from filing due to their service, who receive 90 days from discharge to file.

The Service Requirement: A Trap for the Unwary

Beyond the 90-day deadline lies another procedural requirement that catches many practitioners off guard: proof of service. Before SERB will even accept your ULP charge for filing, you must serve an exact copy on the charged party and provide proof of that service. This isn't a mere formality that can be corrected later. Without proper proof of service, including the recipient's name and address, date and method of delivery, and your signature, SERB will reject the filing entirely.

This requirement creates a practical deadline within the deadline. If day 90 falls on a Friday, you cannot wait until that day to prepare and serve your charge. You must build in time for service and documentation, effectively shortening your actual deadline by several days.

The 10-Day Answer: When Silence Equals Admission

Once SERB finds probable cause and issues a complaint, the timeline accelerates dramatically. Respondents have just ten days from receipt to file their Answer, and the consequences of missing this deadline are severe. Every allegation not specifically denied is deemed admitted. Fail to file any answer at all, and you've effectively admitted the entire complaint.

This deadline creates particular challenges for public employers who may need to coordinate responses across multiple departments or obtain legislative body approval for legal positions. For unions defending against employer-filed ULPs, the compressed timeline requires immediate mobilization of legal resources and factual investigation.

The Answer must do more than simply deny allegations. It must contain specific admissions, denials, or explanations for each allegation. Any affirmative defenses must be stated explicitly or they're waived, with only narrow exceptions for jurisdictional and constitutional challenges. Strategic decisions about what to admit, what to deny, and what defenses to assert must be made quickly but carefully.

Strike Notices: The Price of Economic Action

For unions contemplating strike action, Ohio law imposes a particularly intricate set of timing requirements. Even when all prerequisites are met, including exhaustion of mediation and fact-finding procedures, a strike involving work stoppage requires written notice to both SERB and the employer no later than ten days before the anticipated strike date.

This ten-day notice requirement serves multiple purposes but creates strategic complexities. It eliminates the element of surprise, giving employers time to prepare contingency plans. It also locks unions into specific dates and times, reducing flexibility to respond to changing circumstances. The notice must specify exactly when the action will commence and identify the exclusive representative, leaving no room for ambiguity.

The timing interplays with other deadlines in complex ways. Strikes become legally permissible seven days after SERB publishes fact-finding reports, but only if the prior contract has expired. Publication means the date SERB publicizes findings, not when the fact-finder issues the report, creating potential confusion about when the seven-day period begins.

Missing or miscalculating these deadlines transforms protected activity into an illegal strike, subjecting both the union and participating employees to unfair labor practice charges and potential discipline. For employees in essential services who are prohibited from striking entirely, including police, firefighters, and correctional officers, even perfect compliance with notice requirements cannot legalize a work stoppage.

Post-Hearing Exceptions: Preserving Appellate Rights

After an Administrative Law Judge issues a proposed order, the clock starts ticking again. In unfair labor practice cases, parties have twenty days to file exceptions and supporting briefs. For representation matters, that timeline shrinks to just ten days. Miss these deadlines, and the proposed order becomes final, regardless of its merits.

These deadlines often coincide with other strategic decisions. Should you file exceptions to preserve issues for appeal, even if success seems unlikely? How comprehensive should your exceptions be? The timeline doesn't allow for extensive deliberation, yet the decisions made in these few days can determine whether issues are preserved for judicial review.

The compressed timeline becomes even more challenging when multiple parties are involved. Coordinating positions, avoiding contradictory arguments, and ensuring all necessary issues are raised requires careful orchestration under severe time pressure.

The Appellate Sprint: 15 Days to Court

Perhaps no deadline in Ohio labor law is less forgiving than the fifteen-day window for appealing final SERB orders to common pleas court. The clock starts with the mailing of SERB's order, not receipt, potentially shortening the actual time available. The appeal requires dual filing with both the court and SERB, adding logistical complexity to an already compressed timeline.

This deadline's harsh nature reflects policy choices about finality and stability in labor relations. Extended uncertainty about SERB orders could disrupt workplace harmony and bargaining relationships. Yet for parties seeking judicial review, fifteen days provides minimal time for the significant decision of whether to appeal, selection of appellate counsel if different from hearing counsel, and preparation of the notice of appeal with its required statement of grounds.

Strategic Implications for Calendar Management

These overlapping and interconnected deadlines demand sophisticated calendar management systems. For unions, this means establishing protocols that account for internal decision-making processes while preserving time for legal requirements. Every day spent waiting for executive board approval or membership votes is a day lost from statutory deadlines.

Electronic filing, while convenient, creates its own timing considerations. Filings received after 5:00 p.m. on business days are deemed filed the next business day. A 4:59 p.m. filing on day ten meets the deadline; a 5:01 p.m. filing might not. Technology failures, email delays, or server outages offer no excuse for missed deadlines.

The interplay between different deadlines creates cascading effects. A delay in receiving a fact-finder's report, which must be issued within fourteen days of appointment unless extended by agreement, can affect strike notice timing. A request for extension of time to file exceptions, while sometimes granted for good cause, requires consultation with other parties, adding another layer of timeline management.

Practical Protocols for Deadline Compliance

Successful navigation of these deadlines requires more than just awareness; it demands systematic approaches to timeline management. For unions, this means establishing clear chains of command for deadline-critical decisions. Who has authority to file a ULP charge if leadership is unavailable? What happens if a deadline falls during a conference or vacation period?

Documentation becomes crucial not just for proving your case, but for proving your timeliness. Maintaining records of when violations became known, when damage occurred, and when service was completed can mean the difference between a timely and untimely filing. Certificate of mailing, return receipts, and email delivery confirmations aren't just good practice; they're essential evidence of compliance.

Building in buffer time for each deadline protects against unexpected complications. If the deadline is ninety days, treat it as eighty-five. If you have ten days to answer, aim for seven. This buffer provides room for technical problems, service delays, or last-minute strategic reconsiderations without sacrificing procedural rights.

The Cost of Missing Deadlines

The consequences of blown deadlines in Ohio labor law are rarely proportional to the delay. File a ULP charge on day 91 instead of day 90, and you haven't lost one day; you've lost your entire cause of action. Submit strike notice nine days before the strike instead of ten, and you've converted protected activity into illegal conduct.

These harsh consequences reflect the balance Ohio law strikes between protecting rights and ensuring orderly resolution of disputes. Strict deadlines prevent stale claims, ensure fresh evidence, and promote prompt resolution of workplace disputes. Yet for practitioners, they create a minefield where procedural missteps can overshadow substantive merits.

Special Considerations for Complex Cases

Multi-party cases, consolidated proceedings, and pattern-or-practice violations create additional deadline complexity. When does the 90-day period start for continuing violations? How do you coordinate exceptions when multiple unions are involved? What happens when one party's extension request affects another's deadline?

The continuing violation doctrine offers some relief for ongoing patterns of conduct, preserving timeliness if impacts continue within the 90-day window. Yet relying on this doctrine requires careful analysis of whether conduct represents a continuing violation or merely the continuing effects of a past violation.

Similarly, while SERB may consider evidence outside the 90-day window if probative to timely charges, this doesn't extend the filing deadline itself. Understanding these nuances helps maximize the evidence available while ensuring procedural compliance.

Conclusion: Vigilance as a Core Competency

In Ohio public sector labor relations, deadline management isn't just an administrative task; it's a core legal competency. The most meritorious case can be lost to a calendar error. The strongest legal position becomes meaningless if not timely asserted.

For unions representing Ohio public employees, investing in robust deadline tracking systems, clear delegation protocols, and buffer time for all filings isn't optional; it's essential. Training staff on these requirements, maintaining updated calendaring systems, and building deadline awareness into organizational culture can prevent the devastating consequences of missed deadlines.

The complexity and rigidity of these deadlines reflect the broader challenge of public sector labor relations: balancing the rights of employees to organize and bargain collectively with the need for stable, predictable government operations. By mastering these procedural requirements, unions position themselves not just to avoid pitfalls, but to effectively advocate for their members within the system's constraints.

Time may be of the essence in Ohio labor law, but with proper preparation, systematic approaches, and constant vigilance, unions can ensure that deadlines serve as guideposts for effective advocacy rather than barriers to justice. In the end, respecting these deadlines isn't just about compliance; it's about preserving the power to fight for workers' rights when it matters most.

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.