|
CO3s, CVEO3s,
Electronic Services, Fire Marshals, Fleet Support,
Technical
Services Bureau
|
members
in action |
AUGUST 2006
WSP
Violates Member’s Rights;
Unfair Labor Practice Filed
On the morning of July 20, 2006, WPEA Staff
Representative Kathleen Oest went to a pre-scheduled meeting
with WPEA member Barbara Gagner, from the Fire Marshals unit
of the Washington State Patrol (WSP). They were to meet on
the issue of her supervisor violating the PDP process. They
met once before when the initial PDP was delivered to Gagner
because she felt it was forced on her to sign without the
usual collaborative involvement.
The supervisor, Chuck White, demanded that
Oest leave, based on a directive from WSP Human Resources
Director, Juliet Jones. “I told them I was there to
represent Barb and would not leave,” said Oest. “I called
her (Jones) office about five minutes before the meeting
began, to let her know that I was going to be present at
this meeting as well, but when we got there, the supervisor
said I was not welcome and this time he dug his heels in and
told me to leave three times!”
And, three times Oest told him that she was
representing Gagner because she felt as if it might become
disciplinary. He said it was not intended to be
disciplinary, and then left to talk with Jones. They
cancelled the meeting, notifying Gagner that the meeting
would be rescheduled. She told them that when it was
rescheduled, her staff representative would be there again.
Oest attempted to discuss further with Gagner
at her work station, but White said she was not allowed to
go back with her. Oest complied with his request and left
immediately. She was then escorted out of the building while
two men in ties watched her get into her car. Gagner was
extremely upset and had to go home due to high blood
pressure brought on by the stress of the situation. She was
intimidated … this intimidation is a daily occurrence for
her.
This was a MAJOR violation of a represented
employee’s right to have union representation, especially if
they continue to attempt to have this meeting without her
union representative. WPEA’s General Government Master
Bargaining Agreement is very clear that employees have the
right to representation at all levels on any matter
adversely affecting their conditions of employment.
Article 35.1 Representation – Upon
request, employees will have the right to representation
at all levels on ANY matter adversely affecting their
conditions of employment. The exercise of this right
will not unreasonably delay or postpone a meeting.
Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement,
representation will not apply to discussions with an
employee in the normal course of duty, such as giving
instructions, assigning work, informal discussions,
delivery of paperwork, staff or work unit meetings, or
other routine communications with an employee.
This was not a “routine” communication with
an employee and was not in the normal course of duty! She
was obviously concerned how this affected her conditions of
employment and was denied union representation. And, Gagner
did not have to be in jeopardy of a disciplinary action, she
just had to reasonably believe that the meeting would have
an adverse affect on her conditions of employment.
WPEA filed a grievance regarding the violation of Article
35.1 on behalf of Gagner and a ULP alleging that the
employer interfered with Gagner in the exercise of her
rights guaranteed by RCW 41.80. And, since Gagner was
denied her right to have union representation in “connection
with the exercise of her collective bargaining rights” WPEA
has also filed an Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) against WSP.
|
|
|
Bargaining Units