DECISIONS

Decision Information

Snohomish Public Hospital District 1 (SEIU Local 1199NW), Decision 10067 (PECB, 2008)

Collection DECISIONS
Date 05/12/2008
Case Number 21609-U-08
Decision Maker ULP Manager
Case Type Unfair Labor Practice
Statute PECB - RCW 41.56

Decision Content

Snohomish Public Hospital District 2 (Service Employees Interna­tional Union, Local 1199NW), Decision 10067 (PECB, 2008)

 

STATE OF WASHINGTON

BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

SNOHOMISH PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT 1,

 

Employer.

 

JODY VELABORJA,

 

Complainant,

CASE 21609-U-08-5512

vs.

DECISION 10067 - PECB

SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 1199NW,

 

Respondent.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On March 25, 2008, Jody Velaborja (Velaborja) filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming the Service Employees International Union, Local 1199NW (union) as respondent. The complaint was reviewed under WAC 391-45-110,[1] and a deficiency notice issued on March 31, 2008, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a cause of action existed at that time. Velaborja was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint, or face dismissal of the case.

Velaborja has not filed any further information. 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 41.56.150(1), by breach of its duty of fair representation in its failure to pursue a grievance on behalf of Velaborja. The deficiency notice pointed out the defects to the complaint.

One, the Commission does not assert jurisdiction over "breach of duty of fair representation" claims arising exclusively out of the processing of contractual grievances. While a union does owe a duty of fair representation to bargaining unit employees with respect to the processing of grievances, such claims must be pursued before a court which can assert jurisdiction to determine (and remedy, if appropriate) any underlying contract violation.

Two, the following statute applies to the filing of unfair labor practice complaints.

    RCW 41.56.160‑‑COMMISSION TO PREVENT UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES AND ISSUE REMEDIAL ORDERS AND CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS. (1) The commission is empowered and directed to prevent any unfair labor practice and to issue appropri­ate remedial orders: PROVIDED, That a complaint shall not be processed for any unfair labor practice occurring more than six months before the filing of the complaint with the commission.

The complaint was filed on March 25, 2008. Allegations of violations subject to remedial orders by the Commission must have occurred on or after September 25, 2007. The information attached to the complaint indicates that Velaborja was removed from her position on March 3, 2007, and that she was aware that the union had not filed a grievance at the end of March 2007. The complaint is untimely.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is

ORDERED

The complaint charging unfair labor practices in Case 21609-U-08-5512 is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 12th day of May, 2008.

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.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.