Consistent with this view, Connecticut courts have noted that "[t]he collective bargaining agreement provides a multistep grievance procedure, including both informal and formal sessions, through which to resolve disputes." Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 42 Conn. App. 700, 709, 682 A.2d 125 (1996), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Conn. 835, 694 A.2d 1241 (1997). "The goal throughout each level of the grievance procedure is to reach a settlement between the parties."
The individual complainants, the newspaper and the commission then appealed to the Appellate Court, which, after determining that "grievance hearings constituted negotiations," affirmed the judgments of the trial court. Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 42 Conn. App. 700, 709, 682 A.2d 125 (1996). We granted, in identical terms, the two petitions for certification to appeal filed, respectively, by the individual complainants and the newspaper, and by the commission.
Decided October 10, 1996 The petition by the defendant Freedom of Information Commission for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 42 Conn. App. 700 (AC 14938), is granted, limited to the following issue: "Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the grievance hearings in this case did not constitute `meetings' within the meaning of the General Statutes ยง 1-18a (b) because they constituted `strategy or negotiations' within the meaning of the same statute?
"Pursuant to our standard of review, we examine whether the conclusions of law reached by the trial court resulted from a correct application of the law to the facts of this case." Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 42 Conn. App. 700, 705, 682 A.2d 125 (1996), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Conn. 835, 694 A.2d 1241 (1997); see also Alexander v. Retirement Board, 57 Conn. App. 751, 758, 750 A.2d 1139, cert. denied, 254 Conn. 902, 755 A.2d 217 (2000). The plaintiff claims on appeal that the board failed to give proper credit for his years served.
"Pursuant to our standard of review, we examine whether the conclusions of law reached by the trial court resulted from a correct application of the law to the facts of this case." Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 42 Conn. App. 700, 705, 682 A.2d 125 (1996), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Conn. 835, 694 A.2d 1241 (1997). We begin our analysis with a review of several general principles regarding municipal charters.
"Section 1-21 requires that all public agency meetings, with the exception of executive sessions, be open to the public, and that such meetings be properly noticed." Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Commission, 42 Conn. App. 700, 706, 682 A.2d 125 (1996), rev'd on other grounds, 240 Conn. 835, 694 A.2d 1241 (1997). Under ยง 1-18a (b), a meeting is defined as "any hearing or other proceeding of a public agency . . . to discuss or act upon a matter over which the public agency has supervision, control, jurisdiction or advisory power.
Collective bargaining agreements are, in essence, contracts, and, subject to several special considerations applicable to labor contracts, are construed according to usual principles applied to contract construction. See, e.g., Waterbury Teachers Assn. v. Freedom of Information Com'n., 42 Conn.App. 700, 711 (1996); White v. Kampner, 229 Conn. 465, 473-74 (1994); Charette v. Waterbury, 80 Conn.App. 232, 241 (2003). "The traditional rule requiring that courts consider the intentions of both parties in construing a contract is well settled . . . This rule allows parties to enter into contractual arrangements with the confidence that they subsequently will not find themselves legally bound to unknown or unanticipated obligations."