DECISIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

City of Tacoma, Decision 11519 (PECB, 2012)

 

STATE OF WASHINGTON

 

BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

In the matter of the petition of:

 

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 483

 

For clarification of an existing bargaining

unit of employees of:

 

CITY OF TACOMA

 

 

                CASE 25115-C-12-1526

 

                DECISION 11519 - PECB

 

 

                ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 

On September 6, 2012, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 483 (union) filed a petition for clarification of a bargaining unit with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-35 WAC.  The petition concerns classified employees of the City of Tacoma (employer).  The petition was reviewed under WAC 391-35-020, and a deficiency notice issued on September 19, 2012, indicated that the petition was defective.  The union was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended petition or face dismissal of the case. 

 

The union has not filed an amended petition.  The petition is dismissed.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The deficiency notice pointed out the defects to the petition.

 

Unit clarification proceedings are controlled by Chapter 391-35 WAC.  Within that chapter, WAC 391-35-020 applies to the timeliness and limitations relative to petitions:

 

WAC 391-35-020  TIME FOR FILING PETITION

LIMITATIONS ON RESULTS OF PROCEEDINGS.

 

TIMELINESS OF PETITION  

 

(1)  A unit clarification petition may be filed at any time, with regard to:

(a)  Disputes concerning positions which have been newly created by an employer.

(b)  Disputes concerning the allocation of employees or positions claimed by two or more bargaining units.

(c)  Disputes under WAC 391-35-300 concerning a requirement for a professional education certificate.

(d)  Disputes under WAC 391-35-310 concerning eligibility for interest arbitration.

(e)  Disputes under WAC 391-35-320 concerning status as a confidential employee.

(f)  Disputes under WAC 391-35-330 concerning one-person bargaining units.

(2)  A unit clarification petition concerning status as a supervisor under WAC 391-35-340, or status as a regular part-time or casual employee under WAC 391-35-350, is subject to the following conditions:

(a)   The signing of a collective bargaining agreement will not bar the processing of a petition filed by a party to the agreement, if the petitioner can demonstrate that it put the other party on notice during negotiations that it would contest the inclusion or exclusion of the position or class through a unit clarification proceeding, and it filed the petition prior to signing the current collective bargaining agreement.

(b)   Except as provided under subsection (2)(a) of this section, the existence of a valid written and signed collective bargaining agreement will bar the processing of a petition filed by a party to the agreement unless the petitioner can demonstrate, by specific evidence, substantial changed circumstances during the term of the agreement which warrant a modification of the bargaining unit by inclusion or exclusion of a position or class.

 

LIMITATIONS ON RESULTS OF PROCEEDINGS

 

(3)  Employees or positions may be removed from an existing bargaining unit in a unit clarification proceeding filed within a reasonable time period after a change of circumstances altering the community of interest of the employees or positions.

(4)  Employees or positions may be added to an existing bargaining unit in a unit clarification proceeding:

(a)  Where a petition is filed within a reasonable time period after a change of circumstances altering the community of interest of the employees or positions; or

(b) Where the existing bargaining unit is the only appropriate unit for the employees or positions.

(5)  Except as provided under subsection (4) of this section, a question concerning representation will exist under chapter 391-25 WAC, and an order clarifying bargaining unit will not be issued under chapter 391-35 WAC:

(a)  Where a unit clarification petition is not filed within a reasonable time period after creation of new positions.

(b)  Where employees or positions have been excluded from a bargaining unit by agreement of the parties or by a certification, and a unit clarification petition is not filed within a reasonable time period after a change of circumstances.

(c)  Where addition of employees or positions to a bar-gaining unit would create a doubt as to the ongoing majority status of the exclusive bargaining representative.

(6)  Where a petitioning union seeks severance of a portion of an existing bargaining unit of classified employees at a school district or educational service district, appropriate bargaining units existing on July 25, 2005, may not be divided into more than one appropriate bargaining unit without the agreement of the employer and certified bargaining representative of the unit where severance is sought.

 

The union represents Customer Service Representative, Technical (CSRT) positions.  The petition seeks to include three Biosolids Distributor Operator (BDO) positions in the bargaining unit represented by the union, stating that the “Work has evolved and is clearly cashier work, which falls under the CSRT Classification.”  Information provided with the petition includes job descriptions for both positions, showing that they have distinct duties.  Additional information includes letters of May 2012 concerning the processing of payments and stating the union’s concerns over certain procedures affecting the CSRT positions it represents.  The only reference to the BDO position is the statement that “payments are received from the BioSolids Distribution Operators with hand written receipts . . . .”

 

This limited information does not show that BDO work has evolved into CSRT work.  The petition is not timely under WAC 391-35-020(1), and there is no showing of a change of circumstances altering the community of interest that would allow the processing of the petition under WAC 391-35-020(4). 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, it is

 

ORDERED

 

The petition for clarification of a bargaining unit filed in Case 25115-C-12-1526 is DISMISSED as procedurally defective.

 

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this  18th  day of October, 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 391‑35-210.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.