State - Ecology (Washington Federation of State Employees), Decision 9674 (PSRA, 2007)
|
STATE OF WASHINGTON BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION |
|
|
WASHINGTON STATE - ECOLOGY |
|
|
ERIC HARTWIG, |
|
|
Complainant, |
CASE 20861-U-07-5315 |
|
vs. |
DECISION 9674 - PSRA |
|
WASHINGTON FEDERATION OF STATE EMPLOYEES, |
|
|
Respondent. |
ORDER OF DISMISSAL |
On January 19, 2007, Eric Hartwig (Hartwig) filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming the Washington Federation of State Employees (union) as respondent. Hartwig is an employee of the Washington State Department of Ecology. The complaint was reviewed under WAC 391-45-110,[1] and a deficiency notice issued on March 13, 2007, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a cause of action existed at that time. Hartwig was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint, or face dismissal of the case.
No further information has been filed by Hartwig. The Unfair Labor Practice Manager dismisses the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
DISCUSSION
The allegations of the complaint concern union interference with employee rights, in violation of RCW 41.80.110(2)(a), by the union’s not accepting Hartwig’s designation of a charity, and by the union’s unilateral designation of the charity. It is not possible to conclude that a cause of action exists at this time. The complaint is defective.
Complaints charging interference must state facts, that if true, would prove that an employee could reasonably perceive the respondent’s actions as a threat of reprisal or force, or promise of benefit, associated with the employee’s pursuit of collective bargaining rights. City of Tacoma, Decision 6793‑A (PECB, 2000); City of Omak, Decision 5579‑B (PECB, 1998). Hartwig’s complaint uses exactly the same wording as his petition for a ruling on a non-association claim filed in Case 20860‑N‑07‑54. The facts alleged in that petition are insufficient to conclude that the union made any threats of reprisal or force, or promise of benefit, in violation of RCW 41.80.110(2)(a).
NOW, THEREFORE, it is
ORDERED
The complaint charging unfair labor practices in the above captioned matter is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.
ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 9th day of May, 2007.
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
[SIGNED]
DAVID I. GEDROSE, Unfair Labor Practice Manager
This order will be the final order of the agency unless a notice of appeal is filed with the Commission under WAC 391-45-350.
[1] At this stage of the proceedings, all of the facts alleged in the complaint are assumed to be true and provable. The question at hand is whether, as a matter of law, the complaint states a claim for relief available through unfair labor practice proceedings before the Public Employment Relations Commission.