By Rick Gautschi
In City of Seattle (Seattle Police Officers’ Guild), Decision 11291-A (PECB, 2012), a police officer alleged that the employer subjected her to retaliation, discrimination, and a hostile work environment, and that the employer took no action regarding those conditions. Further, she asserted that because it claimed that there was a perceived conflict of interest between the officer and her ex-husband union member, her union failed to file a grievance on her behalf to address the employer’s inaction. In addition, she asserted that the union acted arbitrarily, discriminatorily, and in bad faith in declining to file a grievance on her behalf.
The Commission explained, that it does not assert jurisdiction in duty of fair representation cases that arise exclusively out of the processing of grievances.
When, however, an employee alleges that her union has aligned itself in interest against employees it represents based on invidious discrimination, the Commission will assert jurisdiction. Because the police officer’s allegations of specific facts were sufficient to state a cause of action for union interference, the Commission reversed the Unfair Labor Practice Manager’s decision dismissing her claim.
