By Therese Norton
In Port of Seattle, the Public Employee Relations Commission affirmed Examiner Martin’s ruling that the Port of Seattle did not discriminate against a shop steward when a supervisor “coached” him in his duties. Decision 11848-A (PECB, 2014). The Commission also affirmed Examiner Martin’s ruling that the Port of Seattle did not interfere with the shop steward’s collective bargaining rights through statements made by his supervisor.
In this case, the shop steward had been issued a non-investigatory matter (NIM) for a customer service issue. The union argued that the NIM was disciplinary in nature. One element of a discrimination claim is that the employee incur some kind of adverse action, such as a demotion, termination, or loss of a promotion. Here, the Examiner found, and the Commission affirmed, that a NIM is a non-disciplinary document of an incident that is meant to coach or educate employees. Thus, the Commission concluded, “the employer did not discriminate when it issued and rescinded the NIM.”
There was conflicting testimony about what the supervisor said to the shop steward and whether it amounted to a threat or simply unwelcome comments and unsolicited advice between two shop stewards. (The supervisor in this case was also a shop steward in the supervisor’s union.) The Commission explained that when it reviews an Examiner’s decision, it attaches considerable weight to the factual findings and inferences, including credibility determinations, made by its examiners. In this case, the Commission stated, “we rely upon the Examiner’s credibility determination in finding that the employer did not interfere with employee rights during the conversation between the supervisor and the bargaining unit shop steward.”
For a more detailed discussion about this case, we reviewed the Examiner’s decision in a previous blog article.
