City of Seattle, Decision 11354 (PECB, 2012)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
|
ROBERT K. HIRANO,
Complainant,
vs.
CITY OF SEATTLE,
Respondent.
|
CASE 24663-U-12-6302
DECISION 11354 - PECB
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
|
On March 16, 2012, Robert K. Hirano (Hirano) filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming the City of Seattle (employer) as respondent. The complaint was reviewed under WAC 391-45-110,[1] and a deficiency notice issued on March 22, 2012, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a cause of action existed at that time. Hirano was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint or face dismissal of the case.
Hirano 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 employer interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), by its actions regarding Robert K. Hirano (Hirano).
The deficiency notice pointed out the defects to the complaint.
Hirano’s complaint concerns his grievance over a reprimand, as well as claims of employer harassment. Hirano filed a grievance on November 18, 2011. The grievance is still being processed. His claims of harassment apparently concern the employer’s alleged actions prior to his filing the grievance; Hirano does not give evidence of any employer actions against him after he filed the grievance.
Although Hirano cites a fact-finding meeting of September 15, 2011, any occurrences before September 16, 2011, are not subject remedial action by the Commission under RCW 41.56.160(1), since the Commission cannot remedy alleged violations occurring six months prior to the filing of the complaint. Hirano provides no evidence of employer violations of Chapter 41.56 RCW either before or after he filed his grievance.
Finally, Hirano asks the Commission to conduct an investigation of his harassment charges, and his remedy request includes “reimbursement of stress related leave.” The Commission does not investigate charges of harassment and does not award damages for stress related leave.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is
ORDERED
The complaint charging unfair labor practices in Case 24663-U-12-6302 is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.
ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 20th day of April, 2012.
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
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.