On April 6, 1993, the City of Tacoma filed a complaint charging the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 483, with unfair labor practices alleging that the members of the bargaining unit represented by the union engaged in an illegal and unauthorized strike, beginning on October 7, 1992 and ending approximately two weeks later. The employer alleges that the strike demonstrated bargaining in bad faith because the parties had not reached impasse before the strike began. The employer asked that the Public Employment Relations Commission find that the strike was illegal and post a notice to that affect throughout the city, and that the city be reimbursed for expenses and costs incurred as a result of the illegal strike including attorney fees, overtime paid and other economic losses.

On May 3, 1993, pursuant to WAC 391-45-110[1], the complainant was informed that the allegations failed to state a cause of action and was given leave of fourteen (14) days in which to amend the complaint. The complainant has failed to file an amendment.

The Public Employment Relations Commission has consistently declined to regulate strikes through the unfair labor practice provisions of the statutes. In Spokane School District 81. Decision 310-B (EDUC, 1978), the Commission reversed a finding of interference regarding employer questionnaires relating directly to a potential strike because such a finding would tend to extend the protection of the Act into matters not protected by the statute. In Seattle School District 1. Decision 629 (EDUC, 1979), the employer’s allegation that the teachers’ union created an impasse for the purpose of striking was dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief.

In Concrete School District, Decision 1059 (EDUC, 1980), the employer was not prohibited from making statements (or even threats) in order to deter employees from strike activities. The complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim for relief. See, also, Lake Washington School District. Decision 2317 (EDUC, 1985), where the employer was not prohibited from visiting classes to discuss the impasse in the negotiations between the union and the employer and a potential strike. The Commission declined to assert jurisdiction when the employer threatened the students with a loss of financial aid if they discussed the strike or honored the picket lines.

Neither Chapter 41.56 RCW nor Chapter 41.59 RCW protect the right of public employees to strike. Neither statute contains a clause protecting “concerted activities”. To the extent that they exist, any legal prohibition on public employee strikes in the State of Washington are a product of common law as developed through the courts. Port of Seattle v. International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union. 52 Wn.2d 317 (1958).

In the controversy at issue as in the Spokane School District 81 and Seattle School District 1 cases, the employer seeks to extend the protection of the unfair labor practice procedures to declare the strike illegal and to assess damages. The Commission is unable to assert jurisdiction. Prohibition of strikes by municipal employees is a product of the common law and thus regulated by the court system, rather than legislation and regulation by administrative decision. The Commission neither protects or prohibits strikes under Chapter 41.56 RCW.

NOW THEREFORE, it is

ORDERED

The complaint is dismissed for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 14th day of July, 1993.

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

[SIGNED]

KATRINA I. BOEDECKER, Mediator

This Order may be appealed by

filing a petition for review

with the Commission pursuant

to WAC 391-45-350.