City of Kent, Decision 6339 (PECB, 1998)

On May 13, 1998, the Washington State Council of County and City Employees (WSCCCE) filed a petition for investigation of a question concerning representation with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-25 WAC, seeking certification as exclusive bargaining representative of all facilities maintenance workers employed by the City of Kent. The petition indicated, on its face, that Teamsters Union, Local 117, had an interest in the proceedings as the incumbent exclusive bargaining representative of at least some of the employees involved.[1]

A letter was issued to the parties on May 26, 1998, noting that the unit clarification proceedings would be held in abeyance pending the disposition of this representation petition, but that the petition in this matter appeared to be untimely under RCW 41.56.070 and WAC 391-25-030(1). The parties were advised that a summary judgment would be issued under WAC 391-08-230 to dismiss the petition in Case 13910-E-98-2327 as untimely under the “contract bar” rule, unless good cause was shown within 14 days. Nothing further has been heard or received from the petitioner.

DISCUSSION

The Public Employee’s Collective Bargaining Act, Chapter 41.56 RCW, grants and protects the right of public employees to form and join unions of their own choosing. RCW 41.56.050 requires the submission of any dispute concerning representation to the Commission, and the Commission has adopted Chapter 391-25 WAC to regulate the processing of representation cases.[2]

RCW 41.56.070 imposes two time limits on the filing of representation petitions, one of which is the so-called “contract bar” asserted by Teamsters Local 117 in this case:

Where there is a valid collective bargaining agreement in effect, no question of representation may be raised except during the period not more than ninety nor less than sixty days prior to the expiration date of the agreement.

…

[Emphasis by bold supplied.]

Consistent with RCW 41.56.070, Commission’s rules also limit the opportunity to raise a question concerning representation. WAC 391-25-030 includes:

WAC 391-25-030--Time for Filing. In order to be timely filed:

(1) here there is a valid written and signed collective bargaining agreement in effect covering an appropriate bargaining unit which includes any or all of the employees to be affected by the petition, a petition must be filed during the period not more than ninety nor less than sixty days prior to the expiration date of the collective bargaining agreement, or after the expiration thereof.

[Emphasis by bold supplied.]

Both the statute and the Commission’s rule reflect the “contract bar” policy which is well-established in the practices and precedents of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in its administration of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), as amended.

Close examination of the collective bargaining agreement signed by the employer and Teamsters Local 117, on August 25, 1997, shows an expiration date of December 31, 1999. It thus appears that the “contract bar” principle would preclude the processing of the recently-filed representation case.[3]

NOW, THEREFORE, it is

ORDERED

The petition for investigation of a question concerning representation filed in the above-captioned matter is DISMISSED as untimely filed.

Issued at Olympia, Washington, this 12th day of June, 1998.

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

[SIGNED]

MARVIN L. SCHURKE, Executive Director

This order may be appealed by filing a petition for review with the Commission pursuant to WAC 391-25-390.