Seattle School District, Decision 11779 (PECB, 2013)
STATE OF WASHINGTON
BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
|
Seattle-King County building and construction Trades council,
Complainant,
vs.
seattle school district,
Respondent.
|
CASE 25668-U-13-6576
DECISION 11779 - PECB
PRELIMINARY RULING AND ORDER OF PARTIAL DISMISSAL
|
On April 29, 2013, the Seattle-King County Building and Construction Trades Council (union) filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming the Seattle School District (employer) as respondent. The complaint was reviewed under WAC 391-45-110,[1] and a deficiency notice issued on May 6, 2013, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a cause of action existed at that time for certain allegations of the complaint. The union was given a period of 21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint or face dismissal of the defective allegations.
The union has not filed any further information. The Unfair Labor Practice Manager dismisses the defective claims for failure to state a cause of action. The preliminary ruling concerning the valid claims is set forth in the Order below. The employer must file and serve its answer to the complaint within 21 days of the date of this Decision.
DISCUSSION
The allegations of the complaint concern employer discrimination (and derivative interference) in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), by demoting Tighe Peterson and laying off Tyrone Van Brocklin and Mike Winters, in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW; and employer domination or assistance of a union in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2) [and derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)], by the aforementioned acts.
The allegations of the complaint concerning discrimination and derivative interference state a cause of action under WAC 391-45-110(2) for further unfair labor practice proceedings before the Commission.
The deficiency notice pointed out the defects to the complaint. The statement of facts specifically alleges employer violations of RCW 41.56.140(1) and RCW 41.56.140(2). However, the only facts presented concern alleged discrimination and derivative interference against Peterson, Van Brocklin, and Winters under RCW 41.56.140(1). It is an unfair labor practice in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2) for an employer to involve itself with the internal affairs or finances of a union, or attempt to create, fund, or control a company union, but the statement of facts contains no information indicating that the employer violated RCW 41.56.140(2).
NOW, THEREFORE, it is
ORDERED
1. Assuming all of the facts alleged to be true and provable, the following allegations of the complaint state a cause of action, summarized as follows:
Employer discrimination (and derivative interference) in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), by demoting Tighe Peterson and laying off Tyrone Van Brocklin and Mike Winters, in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW.
Those allegations will be the subject of further proceedings under Chapter 391-45 WAC.
Seattle School District shall:
File and serve its answer to the allegations listed in Paragraph 1 of this Order, within 21 days following the date of this Order.
An answer shall:
a. Specifically admit, deny or explain each fact alleged in the amended complaint, as set forth in Paragraph 1 of this Order, except if a respondent states it is without knowledge of the fact, that statement will operate as a denial; and
b. Assert any affirmative defenses that are claimed to exist in the matter.
The answer shall be filed with the Commission at its Olympia office. A copy of the answer shall be served on the attorney or principal representative of the person or organization that filed the amended complaint. Service shall be completed no later than the day of filing. Except for good cause shown, a failure to file an answer within the time specified, or the failure to file an answer to specifically deny or explain a fact alleged in the amended complaint, will be deemed to be an admission that the fact is true as alleged in the amended complaint, and as a waiver of a hearing as to the facts so admitted. WAC 391-45- 210.
2. The allegations of the complaint concerning employer domination or assistance of a union in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2) [and derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)], by demoting Tighe Peterson and laying off Tyrone Van Brocklin and Mike Winters, in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW, are DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.
ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this 6th day of June, 2013.
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
DAVID I. GEDROSE, Unfair Labor Practice Manager
This 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.