DECISIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

                         STATE OF WASHINGTON

 

          BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

 

In the matter of the petition of:  )

                                   )

KING COUNTY COURT PROTECTION       )

GUILD                              )    CASE 16830-E-02-2780

                                   )

Involving certain employees of:    )    DECISION 7947 - PECB

                                   )

KING COUNTY                      )    CERTIFICATION

                                   )    Representation Election

                                   )    by Agreement of Parties

___________________________________)   

 

 

     Jared C. Karstetter, Jr, Attorney at Law, for the petitioner.

 

     David Levin, Labor Negotiator, for the employer.

 

     Ken Troup, Union Representative, for the intervenor, Teamsters

     Union, Local 763.

 

 

                           FINDINGS OF FACT

    

1.   The above-named petitioner filed with the Public Employment

     Relations Commission a petition for investigation of a question

     concerning representation of employees of the above-named

     employer. The petition was timely filed and was accompanied by

     a showing of interest which was administratively determined by

     the Commission to be sufficient.

 

2.   The organization(s) listed above as intervenors timely moved

     for intervention in the proceedings, and each  motion for

     intervention was supported by a showing of interest which was

     administratively determined by the Commission to be sufficient.

 

3.   These representation proceedings were conducted by the

     Commission in the bargaining unit described as:

 

 

          ALL FULL-TIME AND REGULAR PART-TIME COMMISSIONED OFFICERS

          OF THE KING COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT WORKING COURTHOUSE

          SECURITY, EXCLUDING SUPERVISORS, CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEES,

          DECISION 7947 - PECB                                   Page

 

DISTRICT COURT SECURITY, AND ALL OTHER EMPLOYEES.

 

 

4.   All proceedings were conducted under the supervision of the

     Commission in a manner designed to afford the affected

     employees a free choice in the selection of their bargaining

     representative, if any; a tally of the results previously

     furnished to the parties is attached hereto; and no meritorious

     objections have been filed with respect to these proceedings.

 

                          CONCLUSION OF LAW

 

1.   The unit described in paragraph 3 of the foregoing Findings of

     Fact is an appropriate unit for the purposes of collective

     bargaining within the meaning of RCW 41.56.060.

 

2.   All conditions precedent to a certification have been met.

 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, it is

 

                              CERTIFIED

 

The employees of the above-named employer in the appropriate

bargaining unit described in paragraph 3 of the foregoing Findings

of Fact have chosen:

 

 

                  KING COUNTY COURT PROTECTION GUILD

 

 

as their representative for the purpose of collective bargaining

with their employer.

 

 

Issued at Olympia, Washington, this 26th day of December, 2002.

 

 

                         PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

 

 

               MARVIN L. SCHURKE, Executive Director

 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.