August 3, 2023
By Jim Cline and Abagail Klonsinski
In City of Lakewood, Arbitrator Mayne ordered reinstatement and expungement of a police officer’s record after finding there was no just cause to terminate the Officer for untruthfulness.
Filed Under: Discipline
August 3, 2023
By Jim Cline and Abagail Klonsinski
In King County Corrections Guild, Examiner Slone-Gomez dismissed a case after finding a King County Corrections Officer failed to show that his union had breached its duty of fair representation (DFR) by refusing to file a grievance regarding his involuntary separation from the County.
Filed Under: Public Sector Collective Bargaining Rights
November 23, 2022
By Jim Cline and Kim Lowe
In Pierce County, Arbitrator Clauss reinstated a deputy police officer, finding that the County failed to prove that she was intentionally dishonest or that she withheld any information material to a separate investigation. The Arbitrator applied the usual principles of just cause and progressive discipline and found that the department did not have just cause to terminate the Deputy.
Filed Under: Discipline
November 22, 2022
By Jim Cline and Kim Lowe
In City of Bellingham and City of Issaquah, PERC Executive Director Sellars ruled that both units would stay intact, dismissing severance petitions that would have broken certain police support employees from the larger units. Director Sellars found that the disputed employees and their existing unit still share a community of interest in spite of certain member dissatisfaction issues. Sellars also noted that severance in Issaquah would create work jurisdiction disputes that did not exist before.
Filed Under: Public Sector Collective Bargaining Rights
October 26, 2022
By Cynthia McNabb and Kim Lowe
In Williams v. Fairfax Cnty., a District Court judge ruled that a police and fire dispatcher’s ADA suit could go forward on the theory that Fairfax County, Virginia engaged in unreasonable delay in granting the dispatcher’s request for accommodation.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination, Employment Discrimination
October 26, 2022
By Cynthia McNabb and Kim Lowe
In Aponte v. Akima Global Services, a District Court judge ruled that the Miami, Florida-based Department of Corrections’ contractor, Akima Global, did not discriminate against its former employee when it terminated her for chronic absenteeism. Regular attendance is a valid job qualification for corrections officers and Aponte’s spinal injury prohibited her from fulfilling that job duty, among others.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination, Employment Discrimination
October 19, 2022
By Jim Cline and Kim Lowe
In City of Tallahassee, Arbitrator Baroni upheld a police officer’s policy violation for failure to use de-escalation techniques with a suspect, however he reduced the discipline from an 8-hour suspension to a written reprimand. While several factors contributed to Baroni’s decision to reduce the discipline, the main one was that Tallahassee Police Chief Revell acknowledged he deliberated departed from the usual, more moderate discipline, to “set the tone for his expectations in the department.” Baroni held choice resulted in too severe a punishment.
Filed Under: Discipline
May 25, 2022
By James Cline and Stephen Hatton
In Spokane County, Decision 13435 (PECB, 2021), PERC Hearing Examiner Erin Slone-Gomez found that the County had violated its duty to bargain in good faith by insisting their negotiation sessions with the Corrections Union be open to the public. She found ground rules for negotiations to be a permissive subject of bargaining.
Filed Under: Duty to Bargain, Uncategorized
May 25, 2022
By Jim Cline and Stephen Hatton
In Ben Franklin Transit, Hearing Examiner Dario De La Rosa found that a Teamsters Union Representative had engaged in bad faith bargaining because of his hostile, discriminatory, and abusive conduct at the bargaining table.
Filed Under: Duty to Bargain
May 23, 2022
By Jim Cline and Stephen Hatton
In City of Cashmere, Decision 13429 (PECB, 2021), PERC Hearing Examiner Elizabeth Snyder dismissed a Teamsters Local 760 complaint alleging that the City had refused to bargain over its decision to implement a facial-recognition timekeeping system. Examiner Snyder rejected the City claim that the Teamsters had waived their right to bargain in their contract. But she also found that City's decision to implement the system was a permissive subject of bargaining, and therefore she dismissed the Teamsters' complaint.
