In Community Transit, PERC Examiner Ramerman held that installation of video cameras on buses is not a mandatory subject of bargaining. Examiner Ramerman reasoned that: (1) video cameras had already been used in the buses, albeit in a more limited capacity; (2) bus drivers have no reasonable expectation of privacy while driving the buses; and (3) the cameras could further the employer’s significant interest in passenger and driver safety. Based on these three determinations, Examiner Ramerman concluded that the employer is not required to bargain with the bus drivers’ union over the camera installation.
In City of Walla Walla, Examiner Slone-Gomez held that the City of Walla Walla did not unilaterally change the off-duty weapon policy for police officers and sergeants. The Examiner determined that the employer provided notice and opportunity to bargain the policy, but that the Guild waived its right to bargain through inaction.
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 Port of Bellingham, PERC Examiner Martin held that the employer did not commit a ULP by transferring daily inspection duties away from its maintenance employees without first providing an opportunity to bargain. Examiner Martin noted that the Port did not have an obligation to bargain in this case because (1) the work was so briefly assigned to the maintenance bargaining unit, (2) non-bargaining unit employees had also been performing the work, and (3) by the time the work was transferred to other port employees it was fundamentally different from the maintenance bargaining unit’s regular work.
In Central Washington University, PERC Examiner Slone-Gomez held that the University committed a ULP when it contracted out a roofing project without first providing notice to and an opportunity to bargain with the Maintenance Mechanics Union in violation of RCW 41.80.110(1)(a) and (e).
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.
In Seattle School District, PERC Examiner Ramerman held that the Employer refused to bargain in good faith by failing to timely provide relevant information requested by the International Union of Operating Engineers in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) and (4). Examiner Ramerman noted that “although the [E]mployer acknowledged the [Union’s information] request two weeks after the request was made, the [E]mployer ‘dropped the ball’ and took no additional action for approximately five weeks from late August 2013 until early October 2013.”
In Port of Anacortes, PERC Examiner Page Garcia dismissed an unfair labor practice (ULP) complaint filed against the Port of Anacortes for unilaterally changing the health insurance benefits of Union members. Examiner Garcia found that although the Port of Anacortes had “failed to maintain the status quo by changing the health insurance benefits offered to bargaining unit employees” and had “presented the change in health insurance benefits as a fait accompli”, the Employer “met its burden of proof to support its defense of business necessity.”
A ‘triggering event’ signals important deadlines for filing unfair labor practice complaints or else a party may risk losing the opportunity to file a complaint with the Public Employee Relations Commission (PERC). In Lake Washington School District, the Commission found that the Examiner Page A. Garcia erred in dismissing the IBEW Local 46’s skimming complaint as untimely and beyond the statute of limitations. The Commission explained that, in a skimming case, the triggering event for the statute of limitations is when bargaining unit work is assigned to non-bargaining unit employees, and not when the union receives notice of the employer’s intent to transfer the work, as the Examiner had concluded.
