APPEARANCES:

MS. JUDITH A. LONNQUIST, General Counsel, Washington Education Association, appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

MR. JOHN DAVID TERRY II, appeared on behalf of the employer.

On March 14, 1978, the Ridgefield Education Association filed a petition with the Public Employment Relations Commission seeking a binding declaratory ruling on the question of whether an agreement between the parties as to association leave was in violation of RCW 41.59.140(1)(b). The matter was considered by the Commission for preliminary action under WAC 391-08-500 on April 14, 1978, at which time the Commission established May 15, 1978 as the deadline for filing of briefs and written evidence.

This Commission has authority under the Administrative Procedure Act, RCW 34.04.080, to issue a declaratory ruling with respect to the applicability to any person, property, or state of facts of any rule or statute enforceable by it. The association leave provision before the Commission in this case is somewhat narrower than the proposal considered by the Commission in Enumclaw School District, Decision 222 (EDUC, 1977). A dispute exists, and the Commission hereby renders a declaratory ruling which is binding between the Commission and the parties.

RCW 28A.58.100 gives school district boards of directors authority, but does not require them to:

"(2) Adopt written policies granting leaves to persons under contracts of employment with the school district(s) in positions requiring either certification or noncertification qualifications, including but not limited to leaves for attendance at official or private institutes and conferences and sabbatical leaves for employees in positions requiring certification qualification, and leaves for illness, injury, bereavement and emergencies for both certificated and noncertificated employees, and with such compensation as the board of directors prescribe." (Emphasis added).

RCW 41.59.140(1)(b) makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer:

"(b) To dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any employee organization or contribute financial or other support to it: Provided, That subject to rules and regulations made by the commission pursuant to RCW 41.59.110, an employer shall not be prohibited from permitting employees to confer with it or its representatives or agents during working hours without loss of time or pay. (Emphasis added).

Cases in the private sector are generally inapplicable to the questions raised by this particular request for declaratory ruling, because in cases arising under laws relating to public schools, the school districts are considering the expenditure of taxpayers' money and statutory authorization for paid leaves of absence must be strictly construed.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Ridgefield Education Association and Ridgefield School District No. 122 are parties to a 1976-78 collective bargaining agreement which contains a provision for leaves, as follows:

"Up to eight (8) days of released time per school year shall be available for the Association to request leave time for officers and representatives of the Association for Association business, including conferences, consultant work, and negotiations subject to the following:

A. The released days shall be with the Association representative receiving full pay and the Association paying for all costs for the substitute.

B. The request must be in writing to the principal or supervisor and the personnel office a minimum of four (4) school days in advance, unless this is not feasible, in which case it shall not be less than one (1) day in advance.

C. The purpose for the leave shall be clearly stated.

D. The leave shall not be granted if the principal and the teacher agree that the leave will be detrimental to the educational program or the individual's responsibilities."

2. The parties have a disagreement as to whether the provision of their collective bargaining agreement set forth in paragraph 1 violates RCW 41.59.140(l)(b).

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECLARATORY RULING

1. Leaves of absence for attendance at official or private institutes and conferences with such compensation as the board of directors may prescribe or agree to constitutes a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.

2. Denial of such leave may not legally be conditioned solely on the teacher's "agreement" that the leave will be detrimental to the educational program or the individual teacher's responsibilities, and such leave must be subject to denial where it is for a purpose illegal under RCW 41.59.

3. The term "officers and representatives of the association" is too broad and could include anyone so designated without limit as to number or responsibility. The officers and representatives eligible for such leave must be designated in the contract by title or other official designation.

4. Attendance to "association business" stemming from or related to the affairs of the local association, and conferences and negotiations with the employer are within the law, but the terms "association business", "conferences", "consultant work" and "negotiations" are fatally overbroad in the language of the agreement between the parties absent some limitation to matters stemming from or related to the local bargaining relationship.

5. The underlined portion of the proviso to RCW 41.59.140(1)(b), as set forth above, is for the benefit of individual employees and not their bargaining representatives; however, the manner in which and the terms on which such employees may be represented while exercising the rights set out in the proviso are mandatory subjects of collective bargaining. Such collective bargaining may not limit or restrict in any way the right of individual employees to exercise such statutory privileges without representation by the exclusive bargaining representative.

DATED this 9th day of June, 1978.

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

[SIGNED]

MARY ELLEN KRUG, Chairman

[SIGNED]

MICHAEL H. BECK. Commissioner

[SIGNED]

PAUL A. ROBERTS, Commissioner