1,430 result(s)
-
776.
Pierce County, Decision 13171 (PECB, 2020) - 03/16/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeHe issued a deficiency notice for the allegations that the employer discriminated against the union officers by subjecting them to an investigation and dominated the union. [...] A cause of action has not been found for discrimination in relation to the investigations.
-
777.
City of Seattle (Carpenters Union Local 131), Decision 5034 (PECB, 1995) - 03/10/1995
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeOn May 20, 1994, David Cordaro filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission, alleging Carpenters Union, Local 131 (union), had unlawfully attempted to enforce union security obligations, and had discriminated against him for filing charges. [...] 1. The allegation that the union discriminated against Cordaro for filing charges Is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.
-
778.
King County, Decision 3178-A (PECB, 1989) - 07/21/1989
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice1. Cease and desist from interfering with, restraining, coercing and discriminating against employees in the exercise of their rights under Chapter 41.56 RCW, and specifically with respect to the filing of grievances under a collective bargaining agreement covering their employment. [...] 2. Make Patricia Higgins whole for the wages and benefits lost as a result of the discrimination against her, by payment of back pay at the rate of pay of the "animal control officer" position that became available in March of 1988, from the date that such position was filled until the date of the unconditional offer of
-
779.
City of Seattle (SEIU Local 6), Decision 2148 (PECB, 1985) - 01/22/1985
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeBy way of contrast, Elma School District (Elma Teachers Organization), Decision 1349 (PECB, 1982), involved allegations of discrimination against a grievant because of her previous support of another labor organization. [...] There is no allegation that the complainant was discriminated against on any unlawful basis.
-
780.
King County (King County Security Guild), Decision 13494 (PECB, 2022) - 03/31/2022
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe duty of fair representation originated with decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States holding that an exclusive bargaining representative has the duty to fairly represent all of those for whom it acts, without discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination.
-
781.
Enumclaw School District, Decision 11090 (PECB, 2011) - 06/08/2011
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern: Employer interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1); employer discrimination (and if so, derivative interference) in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1); employer domination or assistance of a union in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2) [and if so, derivative [...] 2. The allegations of the complaint concerning employer discrimination (and if so, derivative interference) in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)]; and employer domination or assistance of a union in violation of RCW 41.56.140(2) [and if so, derivative interference in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1)], are DISMISSED for failure to
-
782.
Shoreline Community College (Community College District 7) (Shoreline Community College Federation of Teachers), Decision 10675 (CCOL, 2010) - 02/12/2010
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern union interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(2)(a) and discrimination for filing charges in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(2)(c), by its actions concerning Roscoe. [...] Roscoe alleges union interference with employee rights and discrimination for filing charges, by the union’s failure to adequately represent him in the RIF, by failing to pursue information and advising him to accept the RIF, by not representing him at an arbitration hearing over the RIF, by failing to represent him during
-
783.
Klickitat Public Hospital District 1, Decision 9635 (PECB, 2007) - 04/09/2007
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern employer interference with employee rights and discrimination in reprisal for protected union activities in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), by retaliatory actions of management officials, and a unilateral change of the status quo in violation of WAC 391‑25‑140 through reassignment of [...] For a discrimination violation, the typical result is an order making the discriminatee employee(s) whole.
-
784.
King County (SEIU Local 925), Decision 9191 (PECB, 2005) - 12/14/2005
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern union interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.150(1), inducement of employer to commit an unfair labor practice in violation of RCW 41.56.150(2) and discrimination for filing an unfair labor practice charge in violation of RCW 41.56.150(3), by failing to follow [...] Five, in relation to the allegations of violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), a violation concerning discrimination for filing unfair labor practice charges cannot stand absent evidence that McDonald has previously filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the Commission.
-
785.
State - Corrections (Teamsters Local 117), Decision 8376 (PSRA, 2004) - 02/03/2004
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe allegations of the complaint concern union interference with employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.150(1), inducement of employer to commit an unfair labor practice in violation of RCW 41.56.150(2), discrimination for filing an unfair labor practice charge in violation of RCW 41.56.150(3), and other unspecified [...] Three, in relation to the allegations of violation of RCW 41.56.150(3), a violation concerning discrimination for filing unfair labor practice charges cannot stand absent evidence that the complainant has previously filed an unfair labor practice complaint with the Commission.
-
786.
Grant Public Hospital District 1, Decision 7503 (PECB, 2001) - 09/21/2001
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeEmployer interference with employee rights and discrimination in violation of RCW 41.56.140(1), and employer discrimination for filing unfair labor practice charges in violation of RCW 41.56.140(3), by closing the E.M.S./Ambulance Division in reprisal for union activities protected by Chapter 41.56 RCW.
-
787.
Grays Harbor College, Decision 6946 (CCOL, 2000) - 01/27/2000
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeOn November 15, 1999, Gary Murrell filed a complaint charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, alleging that Grays Harbor College (employer) had interfered with his rights and discriminated against him, in violation of RCW 28B.52.073.The complaint was amended [...] Employer interference with employee rights and discrimination, in violation of RCW 28B.52.073(1)(a) and (c), by multiple actions taken in response to and reprisal for the activities and leadership of Gary Murrell in and on behalf of the exclusive bargaining representative of the employer’s academic employees, including:
-
788.
Jefferson Transit Authority, Decision 5928 (PECB, 1997) - 05/30/1997
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice• Paragraph 2 was additionally found insufficient as to the basis for alleged discrimination. [...] It was pointed out the Public Employment Relations Commission does not have authority to determine or remedy claims of discrimination based upon filing of complaints with the Department of Labor and Industries.
-
789.
King County, Decision 5720-A (PECB, 1997) - 04/22/1997
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe other complaint, which alleged interference with employee rights, domination or assistance of union, and discrimination on the part of King County (employer), was docketed as Case 12649-U-96-3019. [...] The Commission has previously dismissed petitions for review filed as little as one day late.[3] In dismissing late petitions for review, the Commission has not discriminated between those filed by attorneys and those filed by pro se. parties.[4]
-
790.
Mukilteo School District, Decision 4861 (PECB, 1994) - 09/30/1994
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeOn April 15, 1994, the complainant submitted materials alleging that the employer was continuing to discriminate and retaliate against him by contacting his present employer and threatening to take their business elsewhere if they continued to employ Roberts. [...] 5. The allegations that the Mukilteo School District is engaging in discrimination and retaliation against Willard Roberts, by its efforts to "blacklist" him with his current and prospective employers because he filed a grievance and a complaint charging unfair labor practices, are found to state a cause of action for
-
791.
Seattle School District, Decision 9982-A (PECB, 2009) - 11/20/2009
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeRCW 41.56.040 grants public employees the right to organize and designate representatives of their own choosing without interference, restraint, coercion or discrimination from their employer. [...] The bulk of the report relates to Reeves’ findings and conclusions about Zappler’s allegations of harassment or gender discrimination. [...] 3. In February 2006, employee Liesl Zappler filed an internal complaint alleging gender discrimination and retaliation.
-
792.
Port of Tacoma (ILWU Local 28), Decision 1396 (PECB, 1982) - 09/03/1982
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice"The union's duty is to exercise fairly the power conferred upon it, in behalf of those for whom it acts, without hostile discrimination against them."[6] [...] Elma School District, against a non-member, a type of conduct which could clearly have been in Decision 1349 (EDUC, 1982) involved allegations of union discrimination violation of statute under RCW 41.59.090. [...] Additionally, the complainant alleged that the reason for the breach of the union's duty of fair representation was based solely on racial discrimination because the complainant is black.
-
793.
Seattle Housing Authority (Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 8), Decision 13562 (PECB, 2022) - 09/13/2022
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe duty of fair representation originated with decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States holding that an exclusive bargaining representative has the duty to fairly represent all of those for whom it acts, without discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination.
-
794.
King County, Decision 13235 (PECB, 2020) - 09/15/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeAn exclusive bargaining representative has the duty to fairly represent all of those for whom it acts, without discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination.
-
795.
University of Washington (Service Employees International Union Local 925), Decision 13187 (PSRA, 2020) - 04/16/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeAn exclusive bargaining representative has the duty to fairly represent all of those for whom it acts, without discrimination. [...] 1. The union must treat all factions and segments of its membership without hostility or discrimination.
-
796.
Pierce County (Pierce County Corrections Guild), Decision 13147 (PECB, 2020) - 01/13/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Commission explained that the mere designation of “part-time” status does not bring an employee into a classification protected from invidious discrimination. [...] Nothing in the alleged facts demonstrates the union asked the employer to contemplate a statutory unfair labor practice and nothing in the complaint suggest that the corrections sergeants are a classification protected from invidious discrimination.
-
797.
Pierce County, Decision 13122 (PECB, 2020) - 01/06/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Commission explained that the mere designation of “part-time” status does not bring an employee into a classification protected from invidious discrimination. [...] Nothing in the alleged facts demonstrates the union asked the employer to contemplate a statutory unfair labor practice and nothing in the complaint suggest that the corrections sergeants are a classification protected from invidious discrimination.
-
798.
Pierce County, Decision 13121 (PECB, 2020) - 01/06/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Commission explained that the mere designation of “part-time” status does not bring an employee into a classification protected from invidious discrimination. [...] Nothing in the alleged facts demonstrates the union asked the employer to contemplate a statutory unfair labor practice and nothing in the complaint suggest that the corrections sergeants are a classification protected from invidious discrimination.
-
799.
Pierce County, Decision 13124 (PECB, 2020) - 01/06/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Commission explained that the mere designation of “part-time” status does not bring an employee into a classification protected from invidious discrimination. [...] Nothing in the alleged facts demonstrates the union asked the employer to contemplate a statutory unfair labor practice and nothing in the complaint suggest that the corrections sergeants are a classification protected from invidious discrimination.
-
800.
Pierce County, Decision 13127 (PECB, 2020) - 01/06/2020
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe Commission explained that the mere designation of “part-time” status does not bring an employee into a classification protected from invidious discrimination. [...] Nothing in the alleged facts demonstrates the union asked the employer to contemplate a statutory unfair labor practice and nothing in the complaint suggest that the corrections sergeants are a classification protected from invidious discrimination.