1,430 result(s)
-
501.
King County, Decision 7506 (PECB, 2001) - 09/18/2001
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeEmployer interference with employee rights and discrimination in violation RCW 41.56.140(1) by its termination of Mike Rochon in reprisal of his union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW. [...] Allegations concerning interference with the statutory rights of employees or concerning discrimination for union activities are not deferrable. [...] [2] Rather than the “just cause” test applied by arbitrators under collective bargaining agreements, the Commission applies a “substantial motivating factor” test adapted from Wilmot v. Kaiser Aluminum, 118 Wn.2d 46 (1991), Allison v .Seattle Housing Authority, 118 Wn.2d 79 (1991), when evaluating “discrimination” claims.
-
502.
Okanogan County, Decision 6872 (PECB, 1999) - 11/02/1999
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe deficiency notice pointed out that the union’s complaint set forth insufficient facts with respect to an allegation that the employer discriminated against Schreckengast by sending him out of town for training just before the promotional decision was announced. [...] The employer was alleged to have made a unilateral change and/or discriminated against bargaining unit employees by denying the sergeant’s position to the vice president of the union, who scored second on the promotional examination. [...] Employer interference with employee rights and discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), by:
-
503.
Chelan-Douglas Mental Health Center, Decision 3886-A (PECB, 1992) - 12/01/1992
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeYou have previously stated that you are being discriminate against, and harassed. [...] That I had not discriminated or denied anything. He bitterly complained he was not treated equitably. [...] Other “Discrimination” Claims - Other lines of evidence that Glassen played out, in an effort to show a pattern of discrimination, simply lead nowhere.
-
504.
City of Bremerton, Decision 3168 (PECB, 1989) - 03/31/1989
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeEssential to such a finding is a showing that the employer intended to discriminate against the employee. [...] Where an employer responds to discrimination allegations with claim of business reasons for its actions, a shifting of burdens occurs during the course of litigation. ... [...] The three employees, when questioned, all testified that they did not believe that they had been discriminated against in any manner.
-
505.
Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Decision 13329-C (PSRA, 2023) - 12/18/2023
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice - ON APPEAL IN COURTThe Examiner first found that Zarate had established a prima facie case of discrimination. [...] Neither party appealed the Examiner’s finding that Zarate had established a prima facie case of discrimination. [...] The Commission does not have jurisdiction over other forms of discrimination based on whistleblowing, gender, or race.
-
506.
Seattle School District (Seattle Education Association), Decision 9355 (EDUC, 2006) - 06/16/2006
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice2. Assuming all of the facts alleged to be true and provable, the interference and discrimination allegations of the amended complaint in Case 19945-U-05-5063 state a cause of action, summarized as follows: [...] Employer interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.59.140(1)(a), and discrimination in violation of RCW 41.59.140(1)(c), by its transfer of Robert Femiano in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.59 RCW. [...] The interference and discrimination allegations of the amended complaint will be the subject of further proceedings under Chapter 391-45 WAC.
-
507.
City of Vancouver, Decision 7013 (PECB, 2000) - 04/06/2000
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practicemight be deployed by management to snare a wayward and vulnerable employee; questions asked one employee about the discrimination claims of another employee might elicit information about conduct of the employee being interviewed, in addition to information about the employee who claimed harassment or discrimination. [...] Whether the imposition of no-discussion rules was illegal under Chapter 41.56 RCW, or was somehow defensible because of employer concerns about its liabilities under state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination and harassment, will be appropriate subjects for an evidentiary hearing in this case. [...] The employer also had a concern that other employees were discriminating against the officer because of his national origin.
-
508.
Port of Seattle, Decision 6854 (PECB, 1999) - 10/25/1999
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice• While the Commission determines allegations of discrimination related to union activities, the Commission does not have jurisdiction over other forms of unlawful discrimination. [...] Employer Discrimination for Filing Charges - Johnson made reference in Case 14507-U-99-3638 to “employer discrimination for filing charges”, which would be a violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), but review of the Commission’s docket records discloses that was the first unfair labor practice complaint filed by Johnson with the [...] 2. Employer Discrimination - Art. 1 Section 1.10 Termination for not obtaining a State Electrical License as a condition of my employment.
-
509.
City of Kent v. IAFF (2678-I-80) - 08/05/1980
INTEREST ARBITRATIONS - Interest Arbitration1. Article III - Non Discrimination Clause 2. Article XIV and XV - Discipline and Grievance Clauses [...] Non-Discrimination Clause The City proposed a "memorandum of understanding" outside the [...] 1. There should be no change in Article III - Non discrimination clause.
-
510.
King Conservation District, Decision 13360 (PECB, 2021) - 06/08/2021
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeEmployer discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) [and if so derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)] within six months of the date the complaint was filed, by retaliating against Peter Landry in reprisal for union activities protected by chapter 41.56 RCW. [...] Landry’s interference and discrimination allegations of the amended complaint state causes of action under WAC 391-45-110(2) for further case proceedings before the Commission. [...] 1. Assuming all of the facts alleged to be true and provable, the interference and discrimination allegations of the amended complaint state a cause of action, summarized as follows:
-
511.
City of Oak Harbor, Decision 12337 (PECB, 2015) - 05/20/2015
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice1. Employer discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) [and if so derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)] by issuing a written warning to Anthony Slowik on August 15, 2014, in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW, and by refusing to process a grievance filed by Slowik over the [...] The notice explained that the first allegation concerning discrimination against Slowik in reprisal for his protected union activity states a cause of action. [...] Employer discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) [and if so derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)] by issuing a written warning to Anthony Slowik on August 15, 2014, in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW, and by refusing to process a grievance filed by Slowik over the
-
512.
Whatcom County, Decision 11500 (PECB, 2012) - 10/02/2012
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern employer interference with employee rights and discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), and domination or assistance of a union in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2), by retaliatory actions of management officials in connection with the termination of Hungerschafer, in reprisal [...] Discrimination and Interference Regarding the discrimination and interference claims, Hungerschafer states that he was arrested on November 10, 2004. [...] Thus, even viewing the September 18 and October 1 information in a light most favorable to Hungerschafer, inclusion of the exhibits in the statement of facts would not support causes of action for employer interference, discrimination, and domination or assistance of a union.
-
513.
Shoreline School District (Washington Education Association), Decision 8718 (PECB, 2004) - 09/14/2004
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint in Case 18691-U-04-4751 concern employer interference with employee rights and discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), discrimination for filing an unfair labor practice charge in violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), and refusal to bargain in violation of RCW 41.56.140(4), by retaliatory [...] of discrimination under RCW 41.56.140(1), the complaint fails to allege facts indicating that the employer’s actions were taken in reprisal for union activities protected under Chapter 41.56 RCW. Six, in relation to the allegations of violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), a violation concerning discrimination for filing
-
514.
Pierce Housing Authority, Decision 8662 (PECB, 2004) - 07/23/2004
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeTwo, the complaint refers to the filing of a charge of age, disability or race discrimination with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. [...] The Public Employment Relations Commission does not have jurisdiction over allegations of age, disability or race discrimination. [...] Three, in reference to the allegations of discrimination under RCW 41.56.140(1), the complaint fails to allege facts indicating that the employer’s actions were taken in reprisal for union activities protected under Chapter 41.56 RCW.
-
515.
Columbia Basin College (Washington Education Association), Decision 7539 (CCOL, 2001) - 11/05/2001
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice2. Assuming all of the facts alleged to be true and provable, the interference, domination, and discrimination allegations of the complaint in Case 15974-U-01-4073 state a cause of action, summarized as follows: [...] Employer interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(1)(a), domination or assistance of the union in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(1)(b), and discrimination in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(1)(c), by agreeing to contract language granting additional compensation to an academic employee holding the office [...] The interference, domination, and discrimination allegations of this complaint will be the subject of further proceedings under Chapter 391-45 WAC.
-
516.
Wellpinit School District, Decision 4083 (PECB, 1992) - 06/02/1992
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThey include identification of the employer and union, identification of Terri Samuels as a union activist, the origins of the bargaining relationship, a previous case in which the Commission ruled that the employer committed unfair labor practices by discriminating against Samuels and another employee, additional "refusal [...] The paragraph thus states a cause of action as a "discrimination" against Samuels.[1] [...] Paragraph 5 alleges issuance of a reprimand to Terri Samuels, and alleges that the action was taken by the employer in retaliation for Samuels' attempts to convey grievances on behalf of bargaining unit employees.[3] The complaint states a cause of action with respect to an alleged "discrimination" against Samuels, as well
-
517.
City of Mountlake Terrace, Decision 11702 (PECB, 2013) - 04/05/2013
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice4. Discrimination a. Did the employer discriminate against officer Delsin Thomas by imposing two disciplinary penalties? [...] Discrimination RCW 41.56.140(1) prohibits an employer from discriminating in reprisal for the exercise of employee rights protected by the collective bargaining statute. [...] Engaging in protected union activity is the first element in proving discrimination.
-
518.
Federal Way School District, Decision 13688 (PECB, 2023) - 07/12/2023
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeJohnson alleges the filed grievance was a form of harassment, bullying, and discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination. [...] The complaint states that Johnson felt the union’s action of filing a grievance and the grievance impacting Johnson was a form of discrimination.
-
519.
Federal Way School District, Decision 13689 (PECB, 2023) - 07/12/2023
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeGuga alleges the filed grievance was a form of harassment, bullying, and discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination. [...] The complaint states that Guga felt the union’s action of filing a grievance and the grievance impacting Guga was a form of discrimination.
-
520.
Federal Way School District, Decision 13690 (PECB, 2023) - 07/12/2023
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeLopez alleges the filed grievance was a form of harassment, bullying, and discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination. [...] The complaint states that Lopez felt the union’s action of filing a grievance and the grievance impacting Lopez was a form of discrimination.
-
521.
Federal Way School District, Decision 13688 (PECB, 2023) - 07/12/2023
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeJohnson alleges the filed grievance was a form of harassment, bullying, and discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination. [...] The complaint states that Johnson felt the union’s action of filing a grievance and the grievance impacting Johnson was a form of discrimination.
-
522.
Edmonds School District, Decision 13288 (PECB, 2021) - 01/07/2021
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeEmployer discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) [and if so derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)] within six months of the date the complaint was filed, by disciplining Lauri Velasquez in reprisal for union activities protected by chapter 41.56 RCW. [...] The discrimination allegation of the complaint states a cause of action under WAC 391-45-110(2) for further case proceedings before the Commission. [...] 1. Assuming all of the facts alleged to be true and provable, the discrimination allegation of the complaint states a cause of action, summarized as follows:
-
523.
Snohomish County, Decision 12723 (PECB, 2017) - 06/08/2017
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Unfair Labor Practice Manager dismisses the defective employer domination allegations for failure to state a cause of action, and finds causes of action for unilateral change, interference, and discrimination. [...] Employer discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1) [and if so, derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)] since December 5, 2016, by its imposition of a disciplinary suspension of Carrell in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW. [...] The allegations of the complaint concerning unilateral change, interference, and discrimination state causes of action under WAC 391-45-110(2) for further unfair labor practice proceedings before the Commission.
-
524.
Port of Pasco (Port of Pasco Police Association), Decision 7828 (PECB, 2002) - 09/27/2002
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe complaint in Case 16513-U-02-4268 alleged that the employer interfered with employee rights and discriminated against Hansen in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), and discriminated against Hansen for filing unfair labor practice charges in violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), by negotiating new provisions in the parties’ [...] The deficiency notice indicated that in relation to the allegations of discrimination for filing an unfair labor practice charge, the statement of facts attached to the complaint did not contain any factual allegation indicating that Hansen had previously filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the Commission under [...] The complaint in Case 16514-U-02-4269 alleged that the union interfered with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.150(1), discriminated against Hansen for filing unfair labor practice charges in violation of RCW 41.56.150(3), refused to bargain in good faith in violation of RCW 41.56.150(4), and committed an “other
-
525.
Chelan-Douglas Behavioral Health Clinic, Decision 3886 (PECB, 1991) - 10/17/1991
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice1 The first document is an amended complaint alleging that the employer had engaged in further interference and discriminated against him, in retaliation for his filing of the original complaint. [...] The Executive Director found a cause of action to exist on the alleged escalation of the interference with and discrimination against Glassen’s pursuit of statutory rights, culminating in his discharge from employment. [...] Second, the amended complaint filed in this case goes far beyond the harassment or discrimination charged in the first complaint, to allege that the complainant has been discharged for engaging in protected activity.