Snohomish County (Snohomish County Corrections Guild), Decision
10341 (PECB, 2009)


                         STATE OF WASHINGTON
                                   
          BEFORE THE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
                                   
                                   
DIDY L. QUICK,                     )
                                   )
                    Complainant,   )    CASE 22294-U-09-5686
                                   )         
          vs.                      )    DECISION 10341 - PECB
                                   )
SNOHOMISH COUNTY CORRECTIONS GUILD,)    
                                   )
                    Respondent.    )    ORDER OF DISMISSAL
___________________________________)


On February 23, 2009, Didy L. Quick (Quick) filed a complaint
charging unfair labor practices with the Public Employment Relations
Commission under Chapter 391-45 WAC, naming the Snohomish County
Corrections Guild (union) as respondent.  The complaint was reviewed
under WAC 391-45-110,(fn:1) and a deficiency notice issued on February
26, 2009, indicated that it was not possible to conclude that a
cause of action existed at that time.  Quick was given a period of
21 days in which to file and serve an amended complaint or face
dismissal of the case.  
____________________
fn:1     At this stage of the proceedings, all of the facts alleged in
the complaint are assumed to be true and provable.  The question at
hand is whether, as a matter of law, the complaint states a claim
for relief available through unfair labor practice proceedings
before the Public Employment Relations Commission.


Quick has not filed any further information.  The Unfair Labor
Practice Manager dismisses the complaint for failure to state a
cause of action.

DISCUSSION

The allegations of the complaint concern union interference with
employee rights in violation of RCW 41.56.150(1), by breach of its
duty of fair representation in not pursuing a grievance concerning
Didy L. Quick, and other unspecified violations.

The deficiency notice pointed out the defects to the complaint. 
First, the Commission does not assert jurisdiction over "breach of
duty of fair representation" claims arising exclusively out of the
processing of contractual grievances.  While a union does owe a duty
of fair representation to bargaining unit employees with respect to
the processing of grievances, such claims must be pursued before a
court which can assert jurisdiction to determine (and remedy, if
appropriate) any underlying contract violation.  The allegations of
the complaint solely concern Quick's claim over the processing of a
grievance regarding seniority.  The Commission has no jurisdiction
in this matter.

Second, Quick checked the box on the complaint form for "other
unfair labor practice," but did not specify the nature of the
alleged violations and provide statutory references.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is 

                               ORDERED

The complaint charging unfair labor practices in Case
22294-U-09-5686 is DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.

ISSUED at Olympia, Washington, this  25th  day of March, 2009.


                    PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION




                    DAVID I. GEDROSE, Unfair Labor Practice Manager


This order will be the final order of the 
agency unless a notice of appeal is filed 
with the Commission under WAC 391-45-350.