Washington Labor and Employment Blog
The latest case law and legal developments in Washington labor & employment law.
By Chris Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
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).
By Chris Casillas and Jordan Jones
In Port of Anacortes, the Commission reversed an Examiner’s decision that the Employer did not unilaterally change working conditions by ending the use of a light duty assignment without providing notice to the Union and an opportunity to bargain. The Commission held that the Examiner incorrectly analyzed the issue as to whether the Employer unilaterally changed a past practice. The Commission stated that in cases involving newly organized bargaining units who had not finished negotiating their first CBAs, the issue is whether the Employer unilaterally changed the status quo without bargaining.
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Sambasivan v. Kadlec Medical Center, Division III of the Washington State Court of Appeals, overturned the dismissal of a doctor’s racial discrimination and retaliation claims. The Indian doctor sued the Hospital after it implemented a proficiency standard that prevented him from practicing his specialty. The trial court dismissed his claims, finding that the doctor lacked the necessary relationships with the Hospital to allow his lawsuit. However, the Court of Appeals reversed that decision, holding that such claims could be brought when the Hospital interfered with the doctor’s right to make additional contracts with the Hospital and obtain new patients when the doctor was acting as an independent contractor for the Hospital in certain functions.
By Erica Shelley Nelson and Brennen Johnson
In Becker v. Community Health Systems, Inc., Division III of the Washington State Court of Appeals determined that a Chief Financial Officer could sue his former employer for firing him when he refused to submit a false or misleading financial report. Although the Company sought to dismiss the CFO’s lawsuit, the Court decided that the former CFO could pursue a state common law claim for “wrongful discharge in violation of public policy.”
By Chris Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
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:
By Chris Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
In Pierce County, PERC Examiner Lisa A. Hartrich held that the Employer did not commit an unfair labor practice (ULP). Examiner Hartrich stated that the Union did not make a prima facie case for their discrimination claim and that the interference allegations were untimely filed.
By Chris Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
In Spokane County, PERC Examiner Dianne Ramerman held that Spokane County Sheriff Ozzie Knezovich did not interfere nor dominate or assist the Spokane County Deputy Sheriff’s Association when he sent an e-mail to the Union.
By Chris Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
In Port of Anacortes, PERC Examiner Jamie L. Siegel held that the Port did not unilaterally change a past practice when it ended maintenance mechanic David Bost’s light duty assignment. Examiner Siegel also found that the Port did not discriminate against Mr. Bost for union activity when it ended his light duty assignment.
By Christopher Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
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.”
By Christopher Casillas and Jordan L. Jones
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.”
