In Kitsap County, PERC overturned Examiner Ramerman’s decision that Kitsap County engaged in bad faith bargaining. The Commission considered two separate issues: (1) whether to consider Kitsap County’s brief even though it was submitted late; and (2) whether Kitsap County breached its duty to bargain in good faith with the Juvenile Detention Officers’ Guild. On the first issue, the Commission refused to consider the employer’s late brief, emphasizing that its procedural rules are to be followed in every case. PERC characterized the late-filing as acting “in complete disregard of our procedural rules” and that it had “previously cautioned the employer that it disregards the Commission’s rules at its own peril.”
In Warden School District, PERC Examiner Whitney considered two unrelated issues: First, the employer did not commit a ULP by not bargaining with the union over whether to adopt a perpetual calendar for the school year. Examiner Whitney found that: (1) the employer had been using the same calendar adoption process for nine years, so there was no change, and (2) although the union wanted to adopt a “perpetual calendar,” the Union never directly proposed it, so the school district did not refuse to bargain. Second, Examiner Whitney determined that the school district did not interfere with a teacher’s union rights by threatening to fire him if he did not take on another class, in part because another teacher testified that she did not think the complaining teacher had been threatened.
In Kitsap County, PERC Examiner Dianne Ramerman held that the Employer “failed to bargain in good faith and committed a ULP in violation of RCW 41.56.140(4) and derivatively interfered with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1).” Examiner Ramerman found that Kitsap County’s “representatives at the table [with the Kitsap County Juvenile Detention Officers’ Guild] did not have sufficient authority to engage in meaningful bargaining.” Specifically, Examiner Ramerman found that Kitsap County’s representatives at the table were.
Both employer and union can violate their good faith bargaining obligations under the state collective bargaining laws when one party advances proposals prior to interest arbitration that are regressive from proposals made earlier in negotiations. In Spokane County (Spokane County Deputy Sheriff’s Association), PERC Examiner Stephen W. Irvin found, and the Commission affirmed, that the Spokane County Deputy Sheriff’s Association breached its good faith bargaining obligations by submitting a regressive wage proposal after impasse and shortly before the parties’ scheduled interest arbitration hearing.
In Kiona Benton School District, the Public Employee Relations Commission affirmed Examiner Coss’s finding that the Kiona Benton Education Association, the Union that represents certain teachers in the School District, breached its good faith bargaining obligation under State collective bargaining laws by refusing to communicate with the District’s designated collective bargaining representatives.
In Washington State University, the Public Employment Relations Commission upheld an appeal by a union that WSU committed an unfair labor practice, reversing the Hearing Examiner. The union alleged that WSU unlawfully contracted out a roof repair project and breached its good faith bargaining obligation in the manner in which the employer invoked a contractual time limit for bargaining. With one Commissioner absent, the divided remaining two commissioners were split on the “skimming” charge, so the Examiner decision that no skimming occurred stands. But, the Commission determined that 13 other pending bargaining demands were improperly ignored by WSU.
Both unions and employers have the right to designate who represents them in the collective bargaining process. In Kiona Benton School District, PERC Hearing Examiner Guy Coss ruled, without a hearing, after a motion for “summary judgment”, that the Kiona Benton Education Association breached its duty to bargain in good faith by refusing to bargain with the School District’s designated collective bargaining representatives.
A union representative is generally permitted to assist a fellow union member who is facing a discipline investigation. But, does that assistance include speaking with potential witnesses? And if so, when can a union representative speak with those potential witnesses?
In Clallam CountyPERC Examiner Emily K. Whitney found that the Washington State Council of County and City Employees AFSCME Locals (unions) did not breach their obligation to bargain in good faith with the employer Clallam County. The employer alleged that the unions refused to reform a mutual mistake to memorandums of agreements (MOAs), excluded the employer’s bargaining representative from the bargaining process and refused to provide relevant information. Clallam County, Decisions 11829 and 11830 (PECB, 2013).
Employers commit an unfair labor practice if they do not engage in good faith bargaining of “personnel matters, including wages, hours and working conditions.” In a recent decision involving the City of Seattle and the Seattle Police Guild, the Public Employment Relations Commission examined the scope of an employer’s obligation to bargain an employer provided benefit of legal representation for police officers involved in civil lawsuits.
