1,430 result(s)
-
1,201.
Shelton School District, Decision 485-A (EDUC, 1979) - 06/14/1979
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThis request is not granted, since it was not conclusively established that Haskell was subjected to discrimination subsequent to the coercive conduct.
-
1,202.
City of Lynnwood v. Teamsters (1291-F-77) - 03/13/1978
DECISIONS - Fact FindingDiscrimination Savings Clause VII. SUMMARY OF PARTIES POSITION In order to outline the positions of the parties before the Chair-
-
1,203.
Seattle School District v. Seattle Teachers Association (1012-F-77) - 09/01/1977
DECISIONS - Fact FindingI therefore recommend, as evidence of continued good faith, that a clause be included in the new Contract asserting that the District will not discriminate against any employee for reason of their membership in, or activities associated with STA, or lack of either, and that the Association will likewise not discriminate [...] Therefore I recommend, the inclusion of the non-discrimination clause (on account of Association activities or lack thereof) in the Contract, as proposed in Issue 8 above, rather than the super seniority provisions.
-
1,204.
Clark County v. Clark County Corrections Deputy Guild (131479-I-19, 2019) - 11/01/2019
INTEREST ARBITRATIONS - Interest ArbitrationAlthough a detailed critique of Janus is beyond the scope of my role here, I observe that the Court suggested that unions did not require a financial incentive to represent nonmembers, as the well-established duty of fair representation obligated unions to avoid discriminating against nonmembers in contract administration [...] Further, the Act also includes various legal job protections, including restoration to one’s former position upon return from leave and various anti-discrimination retaliation provisions.[23]
-
1,205.
Mansfield School District, Decision 4552-A (EDUC, 1994) - 06/08/1994
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice* Non-discrimination * Complaints against employees * Academic freedom [...] The Examiner concludes that the employer was willing to agree on what can only be characterized as minor issues or language that restates external law (e.g., the "non-discrimination" and "freedom to join and negotiate" clauses).
-
1,206.
Kitsap County, Decision 8292-B (PECB, 2007) - 01/31/2007
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIt is well settled that RCW 41.56.040 provides that no public employer shall interfere with, restrain, coerce, or discriminate against public employees in the free exercise of their collective bargaining rights.
-
1,207.
King County (Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587), Decision 8630-A (PECB, 2005) - 04/13/2005
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeUnder National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) precedents, an employer that allows employees to post any materials may not discriminate against union-related notices or the employees that post them.
-
1,208.
Methow Valley School District, Decision 8400-A (PECB, 2004) - 10/29/2004
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice[3] RCW 41.56.040(1) states: No public employer, or other person, shall directly or indirectly, interfere with, restrain, coerce, or discriminate against any public employee or group of public employees in the free exercise of their right to organize and designate representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of
-
1,209.
Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families, Decision 13328 (PSRA, 2021) - 04/01/2021
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeTo establish a cause of action, the complainant must allege its union aligned itself in interest against employees it represents based on invidious discrimination, such as such as union membership, race, sex, national origin.
-
1,210.
Kitsap County, Decision 9326 (PECB, 2006) - 05/17/2006
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeThe complaint alleges employer interference with employee rights, discrimination, and refusal to bargain, by reprimand of the union president in reprisal for union activities, unilateral change in payment practices for requested records, and breach of good faith bargaining obligations.
-
1,211.
City of Tacoma, Decision 5634-B (PECB, 1996) - 10/28/1996
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIn dismissing late petitions for review, the Commission has not discriminated between those filed by attorneys and those filed by pro se parties.
-
1,212.
Tacoma School District (IUOE Local 286), Decision 5337-B (PECB, 1996) - 01/31/1996
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIn this case, Harris claimed that a union business representative did not fully and/or fairly represent her in a gender and racial discrimination complaint filed with another administrative agency.
-
1,213.
City of Tacoma, Decision 5408 (PECB, 1995) - 12/22/1995
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeSee, for example, Port of Seattle, Decision 2796-A (PECB, 1988), where the Commission dismissed a discrimination complaint filed more than six months after the employee became aware of the disputed decision.
-
1,214.
City of Pasco (IUOE Local 280), Decision 5028 (PECB, 1995) - 03/16/1995
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIn a previous case, the union contended that the employer committed a "discrimination" unfair labor practice by means of a disciplinary notice issued to Wicklander following an altercation with a supervisor during the processing of a grievance.
-
1,215.
Mansfield School District, Decision 4552 (EDUC, 1993) - 12/08/1993
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeAs noted in the preliminary ruling letter, employees who suffer discrimination in reprisal for pursuit of a grievance have a cause of action for unfair labor practice proceedings, so that any contractual remedies would only be an alternative to statutory proceedings.
-
1,216.
City of Seattle, Decision 2935 (PECB, 1988) - 05/23/1988
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice(3) To discriminate against a public employee who has filed an unfair labor practice.
-
1,217.
City of Asotin, Decision 1909 (PECB, 1984) - 05/03/1984
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeNo public employer, or other person, shall directly or indirectly, interfere with, restrain, coerce, or discriminate against any public employee or group of employees in the free exercise of their right to organize and designate representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of collective bargaining, or any other
-
1,218.
City of Seattle, Decision 809-A (PECB, 1980) - 06/17/1980
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIn that earlier case, an individual sought redress for alleged discrimination against him in reprisal for his efforts as an individual and outside the context of any organizational or collective bargaining activity, to assist other employees with the processing of grievances under procedures unilaterally adopted by
-
1,219.
City of Pasco (IUOE Local 280), Decision 702 (PECB, 1979) - 08/14/1979
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeIt shall be an unfair labor practice for a public employer: (1) To interfere with, restrain, or coerce public employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed by this chapter; (2) To control, dominate or interfere with a bargaining representative; (3) To discriminate against a public employee who has filed an unfair
-
1,220.
King County, Decision 7357 (PECB, 2001) - 04/11/2001
DECISIONS - ElectionThe Commission clearly has jurisdiction to rule on alleged interference with the collective bargaining rights of employees and/or discrimination against the pursuit of lawful union activities, and it could rule on allegations that application of a classification system constituted interference or discrimination.
-
1,221.
Green River College, Decision 4008-A (CCOL, 1993) - 08/05/1993
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor Practice1. All faculty, full-time or part-time and all other faculty who participated in any coverted [sic] activities shall be returned to work without malice, intimidation, reprisal, discrimination or recrimination or loss of pay either now, or in the future from the college, any of its administrators or any other of its [...] [31] An "amnesty" provision is an agreement, usually made at the conclusion of a strike or other job action, whereby the employer agrees not to punish employees who are accepted back to work, and striking employees agree not to discriminate against non-striking employees after they return to work.
-
1,222.
Colville School District v. Washington Education Association (860-F-77) - 07/20/1977
DECISIONS - Fact FindingIt shall not be a violation of this agreement nor shall any teacher be disciplined, reprimanded or discriminated against for refusing to cross any lawful picket line in the course of performing their duties. [...] Neither the District nor the Association shall attempt to influence any employee in his or her decision through threat, coercion, promise of benefit, discrimination or any other act, illegal under the laws of the state of Washington.
-
1,223.
Spokane Fire District 9, Decision 3021-A (PECB, 1990) - 05/01/1990
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeTo prevail in an unfair labor practice complaint alleging discrimination, the union must sustain a burden of proof consisting of three elements: (1) That the employee was engaged in protected activity; (2) that the employer was aware of the employee's protected activity; and (3) that the employer intended to discriminate [...] Conclusions on "delay" and "discrimination" - The union has not established elements essential to its burden of proof.
-
1,224.
Spokane Fire District 9, Decision 3482 (PECB, 1990) - 05/01/1990
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeTo prevail in an unfair labor practice complaint alleging discrimination, the union must sustain a burden of proof consisting of three elements: (1) That the employee was engaged in protected activity; (2) that the employer was aware of the employee's protected activity; and (3) that the employer intended to discriminate [...] Conclusions on "delay" and "discrimination" - The union has not established elements essential to its burden of proof.
-
1,225.
Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board (Washington Federation of State Employees), Decision 13333 (PSRA, 2021) - 04/08/2021
DECISIONS - Unfair Labor PracticeWhile the facts are not identical, and the complainant also made an allegation concerning gender-based discrimination, the Examiner held that a union’s mistaken failure to timely advance a grievance did not constitute arbitrary conduct that breached a union’s duty of fair representation.