DECISIONS

Decision Information

Decision Content

Skagit County Public Hospital District 1 (United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21), Decision 13223 (PECB, 2020)

 

                                                       STATE OF WASHINGTON

 

                  BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

SKAGIT COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT 1,

 

Employer.

 

 

 

 

CASE 132850-U-20

 

DECISION 13223 - PECB

 

 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

 

 

JENNI BONNER,

 

Complainant,

 

vs.

 

UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS LOCAL 21,

 

Respondent.

 

 

On June 22, 2020, Jenni Bonner (complainant) filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21 (union) as respondent. The complaint was reviewed under WAC 391-45-110,[1] and a deficiency notice issued on July 9, 2020, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a cause of action existed at that time. Bonner was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint, or face dismissal of the case.

 

No further information has been filed by Bonner. The Unfair Labor Practice Administrator dismisses the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

 

ISSUE

 

The complaint alleged:

 

            Constitutional violations.

 

The complaint lacks facts necessary to allege a violation within the Commission’s jurisdiction. Thus, the complaint is dismissed for failure to state a cause of action.

 

BACKGROUND

 

Jenni Bonner is a Medical Receptionist at Skagit County Public Hospital District 1 (employer). There was no statement of facts included in the filing. In an attached email, allegedly at an unidentified time, Bonner was required to sign a membership card for the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 21 (union) and believes her constitutional rights were violated.

 

ANALYSIS

 

Statement of Facts Required and Timeliness

Complaints must contain a statement of facts with numbered paragraphs. The statement of facts should include specific details of the events, the times, dates, places, and participants in occurrences. WAC 391-45-050.

 

There is a six-month statute of limitations for unfair labor practice complaints. “[A] complaint shall not be processed for any unfair labor practice occurring more than six months before the filing of the complaint with the commission.” RCW 41.56.160(1). The six-month statute of limitations begins to run when the complainant knows or should know of the violation. City of Bellevue, Decision 9343-A (PECB, 2007) (citing City of Bremerton, Decision 7739-A (PECB, 2003)). The start of the six-month period, also called the triggering event, occurs when a potential complainant has “actual or constructive notice of” the complained-of action. Emergency Dispatch Center, Decision 3255-B (PECB, 1990).

In this case, the complainant only submitted the unfair labor practice (ULP) complaint form and attached copies of letters sent to the union. To determine timeliness, the Commission looks at the dates of the events in the complaint in relation to the filing date. The complaint was filed on June 22, 2020. In order to be timely, the complainant needed to describe events that took place on or after December 22, 2019. In one of the attached letters, it appeared that the events may have occurred sometime in August 2019, this would be outside of the six month statute of limitations. The letter also states Bonner did not know the statutory rules until recently. Unfortunately, RCW 41.56.160(1) does not allow for the statute of limitations to be extended because an individual or organization did not know about their statutory rights.

 

Constitutional Rights Violations

Because there was no statement of facts, it is unclear if the complaint falls within the Commission’s jurisdiction. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to the resolution of collective bargaining disputes between employers, employees, and unions. The agency does not have authority to resolve all disputes that might arise in public employment. Tacoma School District (Tacoma Education Association), Decision 5086-A (EDUC, 1995). Just because the complaint does not state a cause of action for an unfair labor practice it does not necessarily mean the allegations involve lawful activity. It means that the issues are not matters within the purview of the Commission. Tacoma School District (Tacoma Education Association), Decision 5086-A. Bonner did not file an amended complaint alleging a violation within the Commission’s jurisdiction, thus the complaint must be dismissed.

 

ORDER

 

The complaint charging unfair labor practices in the above-captioned matter is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.

 

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this  20th  day of August, 2020.

 

 

PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

 

 

 

EMILY K. WHITNEY, Unfair Labor Practice Administrator

 

 

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.

 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.