DECISIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

State – Washington State Patrol, Decision 12683 (PSRA, 2017)

 

STATE OF WASHINGTON

 

BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

In the matter of the petition of:

 

TEamsters Local 174

 

For clarification of an existing bargaining unit of employees of:

 

STATE – WASHINGTON STATE PATROL

 

CASE 128865-C-17

 

DECISION 12683 - PSRA

 

 

ORDER AMENDING CERTIFICATION

 

 

Rick Hicks, Secretary-Treasurer, for Teamsters Local 174.

 

Karl Nagel, Labor and Policy Advisor, for the Washington State Patrol.

 

On March 23, 2017, Teamsters Local 174 (Teamsters) filed a unit clarification petition seeking to amend a bargaining unit certification involving employees of the Washington State Patrol (employer).  The employees in the bargaining unit voted to affiliate the Washington State Patrol Communications Managers Association (Association) with Teamsters.

 

The Association currently represents a bargaining unit of the employer’s supervisory communications station managers.  That bargaining unit is described as:

 

All communications station managers employed by the Washington State Patrol, excluding confidential employees, internal auditors, non-supervisory employees, and employees in other bargaining units.

 

State – Washington State Patrol, Decision 8578 (PSRA, 2004).

 

Accompanying the petition was evidence demonstrating that bargaining unit members did in fact affirmatively vote for the affiliation.  The petition also indicated that the employer did not oppose the affiliation vote; the employer itself did not indicate otherwise.

 

ANALYSIS

 

When a union seeks to amend a certification due to its affiliation with another labor organization, it must show that the bargaining unit members were provided with due process prior to the filing of the petition.  Due process may be satisfied through a vote of the bargaining unit members.  Skagit Valley Hospital, Decision 2509-A (PECB, 1987), aff’d, Skagit Valley Hospital v. Public Employment Relations Commission, 55 Wn. App. 348 (1989).

 

Generally, an affiliation will not be rejected where the membership has been provided an opportunity to vote.  However, an affiliation vote may be overturned due to a lack of continuity before and after the attempted affiliation.  A lack of continuity will exist if the organizational changes have been so extensive that a certified bargaining representative has been displaced by a wholly different organization.  Skagit Valley Hospital, Decision 2509-A.  An affiliation vote may also be overturned if other, more traditional evidence exists that the successor organization lacks majority support.  Id.

 

The petitioning labor organization must satisfy due process concerns by providing evidence or documentation that the employees are in favor of the affiliation.  The employees must be provided notice of the affiliation vote, be given an opportunity to discuss the matter, and be allowed to exercise their choice in a manner that maintains ballot secrecy.

 

The petition seeks only to affiliate the Association with Teamsters.  The leadership structure in existence at the Association remains intact and the negotiated agreements remain in effect.  Additionally, the scope of the bargaining unit to be represented by Teamsters remains unchanged.  Finally, Teamsters provided a notarized statement demonstrating that the bargaining unit employees were permitted a vote on whether to affiliate the Association with Teamsters and that the employees unanimously supported the affiliation.  Because it readily appears that continuity and due process requirements have been satisfied in this case, the existing certification is amended.

 

FINDINGS OF FACT

 

1.                  The Washington State Patrol is an employer within the meaning of RCW 41.80.005(8).

 

2.                  The Washington State Patrol Communications Managers Association (Association) is an employee organization within the meaning of RCW 41.80.005(7).

 

3.                  Teamsters Local 174 (Teamsters) is an employee organization within the meaning of RCW 41.80.005(7).

 

4.                     The Association currently represents a bargaining unit of the employer’s supervisory communications station managers.  That bargaining unit is described as:

 

All communications station managers employed by the Washington State Patrol, excluding confidential employees, internal auditors, non‑supervisory employees, and employees in other bargaining units.

 

5.                  On March 23, 2017, Teamsters filed a petition seeking to amend the existing certification of the bargaining unit described in Finding of Fact 4 to reflect that the employees voted to affiliate the Association with Teamsters.

 

6.                  Accompanying the petition was evidence demonstrating that the bargaining unit employees were provided an opportunity to vote on whether to affiliate the Association with Teamsters and that the employees affirmatively voted for the affiliation.

 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 

1.                  The Public Employment Relations Commission has jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to Chapter 41.80 RCW and Chapter 391-35 WAC. 

 

2.                  Based upon Findings of Fact 5 and 6, the Association provided due process to employees in allowing them to vote on whether to affiliate the Association with Teamsters.

 

3.                  Based upon Finding of Fact 6, the Association has affiliated with Teamsters.

 

ORDER

 

The certification issued in State – Washington State Patrol, Decision 8578, is amended to reflect that Teamsters Local 174 is now the exclusive bargaining representative of record.  The bargaining unit description remains unchanged.

 

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this  20th  day of April, 2017.

 

 

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.

 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.