On October 28, 1987, Washington State Council of County and City Employees, Local 21-E (petitioner) filed a petition seeking clarification of an existing bargaining unit of employees of the City of Enumclaw (employer). At issue were two library employees and two janitorial employees.

On February 18, 1988, the petitioner was informed of several difficulties with the petition. The petitioner was given fourteen (14) days from the issuance of the letter to amend the petition. To date, nothing has been received. Neither has the petitioner requested an extension in the time frame set forth in the letter. Given these circumstances, the petition must be dismissed. However, it is appropriate to reiterate the problems noted in the petition as filed.

The February 18 letter noted that the parties to a collective bargaining relationship are encouraged to settle unit placement issues in the context of collective bargaining. In the event that agreement cannot be reached, the issue can be submitted to the Commission for resolution through the unit clarification procedure, but the petitioning party must demonstrate that the unit determination issue was raised during negotiations and that the unit clarification petition was filed before the contract was finalized. See: Toppenish School District, Decision 1143-A (PECB, 1981). In this case, such a showing has not been made, and it appears that the petition could be untimely.

A second problem noted in the February 18 letter was that, while new positions or substantially changed positions may be added to an existing bargaining unit by unit clarification proceedings, that procedure is not available to absorb unchanged positions which pre-exist the creation of the unit. As noted in Wenatchee School District, Decision 1197 (PECB, 1981), the Commission is not disposed to undo a long-standing bargaining unit structure absent a change of circumstances. In this case, it appears that the parties have had a bargaining relationship since at least 1969. The unit clarification petition in this case was accompanied with "showing of interest" cards, and it appears that the petitioner is attempting to use the unit clarification procedure to resolve a question concerning representation. WAC 391-35-010 precludes such a possibility. It is inferred from the petition and from absence of response to the February 18, 1988 letter that the positions at issue have existed for a considerable length of time. Absent some showing that a change of circumstances has occurred, an attempt to "absorb" employees who never were given an opportunity to exercise their right to vote on the question of union representation raises a question concerning representation. The clarification petition must be dismissed.

ORDER

The petition seeking clarification of an existing bargaining unit filed in the above-captioned matter is hereby DISMISSED.

DATED at Olympia, Washington, this 24th day of May, 1988.

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

[SIGNED]

MARVIN L. SCHURKE, Executive Director

This Order can be appealed by filing a petition for review with the Commission pursuant to WAC 391-35-210.