August 18, 2025
By Jim Cline and Amy Liden
In the Washington State Department of Corrections, the Examiner ruled that the Department of Corrections (DOC) cannot unilaterally change its practice of using a volunteer list to assign female correctional officers (COs) to conduct strip searches on transgender female inmates.
Filed Under: Scope of Bargaining
July 30, 2025
By Jim Cline and Peter Haller
In Waleed Muhammad v. Association For Higher Education, PERC ruled that the Union retaliated against a non-tenured employee for engaging in protected activity when the Union president submitted negative feedback to the employee’s pre-tenure committee regarding the employee’s demeanor and temperament towards other faculty members. The hearing Examiner reasoned that the Union president’s submission of feedback constituted union interference because the non-tenured employee was not given the chance to discuss the concerns and improve upon them.
Filed Under: Discrimination and Retaliation
June 20, 2025
By Jim Cline
In Teamster Local 117 v. Washington State Department of Corrections, PERC dismissed a representation petition which sought to place unrepresented supervisors in a bargaining that was separate from the exclusive bargaining unit of like supervisors. The Examiner reasoned that splitting the supervisors into different bargaining units would create work jurisdiction and fragmentation issues.
Filed Under: Representation and Unit Determination
April 29, 2025
By Jim Cline and Peter Haller
In International Association of Fire Fighters Local 542 v. Clark County Fire District 6, PERC dismissed a complaint alleging that the decision not to promote a 24-year veteran firefighter to Battalion Chief was motivated by an anti-union animus. The hearing Examiner reasoned that although the veteran firefighter’s involvement in union activities may have upset the Employer, there was ultimately a non-discriminatory justification for the decision.
Filed Under: Discrimination and Retaliation
April 29, 2025
By Jim Cline and Peter Haller
In City of Kent v. Kent Police Officers Association, the PERC arbitrator ruled that the City of Kent had just cause to terminate an officer alleged to engaged in conduct unbecoming of an officer. The Arbitrator reasoned that termination was justified given the officer’s lengthy disciplinary history coupled with the egregious nature of his conduct.
Filed Under: Discipline
April 29, 2025
By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In King County, Examiner Casillas ruled that King County unilaterally changed the working conditions of King County Department of Public Defense (DPD) workers during a short-lived pilot program that transferred inmates out of the County.
Filed Under: Duty to Bargain
April 4, 2025
By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In Arlington School District, the PERC Examiner found that the District had violated its duty to bargain and had skimmed bargaining unit work from the ironically named Arlington Non-Rep Group (NRG). The school district did not believe the NRG was a union, but prior practice demonstrated that the District had historically voluntarily recognized the NRG as a bargaining unit and thus violated its duty to bargain.
Filed Under: Duty to Bargain
April 4, 2025
By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In King County, Examiner Willaford determined that the Union successfully proved the County violated its duty to bargain by making mandatory overtime a condition of employment. The Examiner ruled that King County’s practice of medically separating corrections officers with medical restrictions on working overtime was a unilateral change to a mandatory subject of bargaining.
Filed Under: Duty to Bargain
March 27, 2025
By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In King County, the Public Employment Relations Commission affirmed its Examiner’s prior decision in which King County was found to have discriminated against an employee by removing him from his elected position on a safety committee. The Commission held that even though the County offered a nondiscriminatory reason for its action the Union successfully demonstrated that the County's actions were merely a pretext for discriminating against the employee due to his advocacy for regular safety committee meetings.
Filed Under: Discrimination and Retaliation, Employment Discrimination
March 26, 2025
By Jim Cline and Sam Hagshenas
In Okanogan County, Examiner Todd ruled that the County refused to bargain when it unilaterally contracted out bargaining unit work to third-party security contractors after making the representation that it was rescinding its proposal to reclassify a then-vacant bargaining unit position.
