Thurston County Fire Protection District 8, Decision 12236 (PECB, 2015)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
|
In the matter of the joint petition of:
THURSTON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT 8
and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS, LOCAL 2903
For clarification of an existing bargaining unit.
|
CASE 26791-C-14-1608
DECISION 12236 - PECB
CORRECTED ORDER CLARIFYING BARGAINING UNIT
|
Christopher Ross, Local 2903 President, for the union.
McGavick Graves, P.S., by Dave J. Luxenberg, for the employer.
On October 17, 2014, Thurston County Fire Protection District 8 (District 8 or employer) and the International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 2903 (union) jointly filed a petition to clarify the existing bargaining unit represented by the union. District 8 merged with Thurston County Fire Protection District 7 in November 2014 as a result of a popular vote. This change expanded the jurisdiction of the employer’s protection services.
The employer’s workforce is comprised of both full-time and volunteer firefighters. Prior to the merger, the employer’s full-time workforce consisted of three Assistant Chiefs and the Fire Chief. The union currently represents a bargaining unit of just the Assistant Chiefs. Thurston County Fire District 8, Decision 11524-B (PECB, 2013).
The employer’s full-time workforce has now substantially changed. The employer has created two new full-time firefighters job classes, Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters. There are currently two employees in the Dayshift Fire Fighter job class. There are no employees in the Lieutenant job class, but the employer plans to fill that job class due to future growth. The employer and union both agree that the Dayshift Fire Fighters and the Lieutenants should be included in the union’s existing Assistant Chief bargaining unit.
The issue to be decided is whether the parties’ agreement to modify the existing bargaining unit to include the Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters should be accepted. The parties’ agreement to modify the bargaining unit is accepted. Including the full-time Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters into the existing bargaining unit would create an appropriate bargaining unit of the full-time, non-supervisory fire fighters in the district.
DISCUSSION
The determination of appropriate bargaining units is a function delegated to this agency by the legislature. City of Richland, Decision 279-A (PECB, 1978), aff’d, IAFF Local 1052 v. PERC, 29 Wn. App. 599 (1981), review denied, 96 Wn.2d 1004 (1981). The goal in making bargaining unit determinations is to group together employees who have sufficient similarities (community of interest) to indicate that they will be able to bargain effectively with their employer. Quincy School District, Decision 3962-A (PECB, 1993). When making bargaining unit determinations, the Commission seeks to avoid fragmentation and potential work jurisdiction disputes. King County, Decision 6696 (PECB, 1999). Bargaining unit determinations are made on a case-by-case basis. King County, Decision 5910-A (PECB, 1997).
In making bargaining unit determinations, RCW 41.56.060(1) directs this agency to consider “the duties, skills, and working conditions of the public employees; the history of collective bargaining by the public employees and their bargaining representatives; the extent of organization among the public employees; and the desire of the public employees.” The criteria are not applied on a strictly mathematical basis. King County, Decision 5910-A. Not all of the factors will arise in every case and any one factor could be more important than another, depending on the facts. Renton School District, Decision 379-A (EDUC, 1978), aff’d, Renton Education Association v. PERC, 101 Wn.2d 435 (1984).
Here, the parties have agreed that the Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters positions should be included in a bargaining unit with the Assistant Chiefs. The parties also agree that although the Assistant Chiefs perform some supervisory duties over the Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters, they do not meet this agency’s definition of a supervisor that would render the proposed bargaining unit inappropriate under WAC 391-35-340. Accordingly, the Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters are added to the existing Assistant Chief’s bargaining unit and the bargaining unit description is redefined.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Thurston County Fire Protection District 8 is a public employer within the meaning of RCW 41.56.030(12).
2. The International Association of Fire Fighters, Local 2903 is a bargaining representative within the meaning of RCW 41.56.030(2).
3. Local 2903 represents a bargaining unit of Assistant Chiefs. The Assistant Chiefs are uniformed employees within the meaning RCW 41.56.030(13)(e).
4. In November 2014, Thurston County Fire Protection District 7 merged with Thurston County Fire Protection 8.
5. The employer has created two new full-time firefighters job classes, Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters. These positions are uniformed, non-supervisory fire fighters and are uniformed employees within the meaning RCW 41.56.030(13)(e).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Public Employment Relations Commission has jurisdiction in this matter under Chapter 41.56 RCW and Chapter 391-35 WAC.
2. A bargaining unit of Assistant Chiefs, Lieutenants, and Dayshift Fire Fighters employed at the Thurston County Fire District 8 is an appropriate bargaining unit under RCW 41.56.060.
ORDERED
The Lieutenants and Dayshift Fire Fighters are added to the existing Assistant Chief bargaining unit and that bargaining unit shall be redefined as follows:
All full-time uniformed fully commissioned fire fighters (as defined by RCW 41.56.030(13)(e)) holding the rank of Assistant Chief, Lieutenant, or Dayshift Fire Fighter employed by Thurston County Fire Protection District 8, excluding volunteer fire officers, volunteer fire fighters, confidential employees, the Fire Chief, and all other employees.
ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 14th day of January, 2015.
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
MICHAEL P. SELLARS, Executive Director
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.