STATE OF WASHINGTON
MARINE EMPLOYEES’ COMMISSION
Evergreen Plaza Building
P.O. Box 40902
Olympia, Washington 98504-0902
(360) 586-6354
Friday, September 24, 2010 – 10:00 a.m.
Rainier Conference Room—Washington State Ferries, Seattle
MINUTES
Present: Members and staff - John R. Swanson, Chairman
Patricia A. Warren, Commissioner
John M. Cox, Commissioner
Linda Hoverter, Special Assistant
Kathy Marshall, Administrator
Others - Jeff Duncan, Marine Engineers Beneficial Association
Karol Kingery, Marine Engineers Beneficial Association
Leah Maurseth, Washington State Ferries Labor Relations Office
Jim McCray, Marine Engineers Beneficial Association
Valarie Peaphon, Office & Professional Employees International Union
David Slown, Assistant Attorney General – Washington State Ferries
Harry Thompson, Puget Sound Metal Trades/IBEW 46
Carrie Wood, Washington State Ferries Labor Relations Office
The meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m.
Moved, seconded and carried: to adopt the agenda distributed at the meeting.
Moved, second and carried: to approve the minutes of the July 23, 2010 meeting.
STATUS OF CASES
MEC Case No. 10-08
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 12/21/07 in which IBU charges WSF with interference, refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU charges WSF with unilateral implementation of payroll system—pay discrepancies. On 8/19/10, IBU withdrew Case 10-08. On 9/8/10, MEC entered Order Closing Withdrawn Complaint, Dec. No. 587-MEC.
MEC Case No. 16-08
MEBA v. WSF—On 10/8/09, WSF filed a petition with Thurston County Superior Court for review of MEC’s decision awarding attorney’s fees. On 1/8/10, a status conference was held on the petition for review. WSF filed its opening brief with the court on 7/13/10. Briefs of Respondents MEBA and MEC were filed on 8/2/10. WSF filed a Reply Brief on 8/12. At the conclusion of the review hearing on 8/27/10, Judge McPhee affirmed MEC’s decision. On 9/22/10, WSF filed a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals, Division II.
On 1/22/10, Jeff Duncan reported that members have been paid the retro portion of the award through 8/31/09. He reported on 9/24/10 that the parties continue discussions to resolve how the issue will be handled going forward.
MEC Case No. 21-08
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 6/20/08 and amended 6/23/08 and again 6/26/08 in which IBU charges WSF with interference and refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU charges WSF with a unilateral change in the working conditions of unlicensed deck department employees (filling open assignments for Summer 2008). The parties reached agreement on issues 1 and 2; IBU provided MEC with a copy on 10/24/08. During MEC settlement on 11/7/08, the parties reached agreement on a third issue. On 1/7/09, WSF filed its Answer to the Amended Complaint. On 1/21/09, the parties gathered for the hearing, but it did not proceed. IBU and WSF spent some time discussing the issue. They agreed to convert the 2/6/09 hearing in Consolidated Cases 19-06 and 17-08 to another settlement conference (without mediator) for Case 21-08. Hearing was continued to 3/3/09, but later cancelled due to IBU Counsel’s unavailability. On 9/25/09, IBU requested that a hearing be scheduled on the issue of assignment of AB work. On 12/4/09, Chairman Swanson reminded the parties that their “Dispatch Rules” settlement provides for resolution of related disputes such as this one through private arbitration with Liz Ford. On 4/23/10, AAG Slown reported that counsel agree the expedited dispute process is appropriate for resolving the dispute, but have not scheduled with Arbitrator Liz Ford yet. On 5/21/10, AAG Slown suggested that the complaint could be withdrawn or dismissed since the parties have agreed to take it to Liz Ford for arbitration. (Counsel will discuss.) On 7/23/10, the parties reported they have not yet found time to schedule an arbitration date with Ms. Ford. IBU is not ready to withdraw Case 21-08 at this time.
MEC Case No. 15-09
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 5/29/09 in which IBU charges WSF with interference and discouraging union membership. Specifically IBU charges WSF with violation of Dec. 518-A MEC (failure to hire R. Jackson as On-call Traffic Attendant). On 2/16/10, Examiner Warren conducted the hearing. MEC received the transcript on 3/5/10. On 4/6/10, IBU Counsel requested the 4/9 brief filing date be extended one week; WSF did not object. Examiner Warren granted the request. Briefs were timely filed—both received on 4/16/10. On July 23, 2010, MEC served Decision and Order, No. 585-MEC.
MEC Case No. 18-09
IBU v. WSF—Grievance filed 6/15/09 in which IBU alleges WSF filled a temporary vacancy in a year-around position. Commissioner Cox was assigned as Arbitrator. On 3/24/10, IBU filed an amendment to Case 18-09, requesting that two additional similar grievances be arbitrated with 18-09, as agreed to by the parties. Arbitrator Cox conducted the hearing on 7/21/10. MEC received the transcript on 8/16/10. On 9/15/10, WSF requested the 9/17 brief filing date be extended to 9/24; IBU did not object. Arbitrator Cox granted the request. Briefs are to be simultaneously mailed on 9/24/10.
MEC Case No. 2-10
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 10/2/09 in which IBU charges WSF with domination, discouraging union membership, refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU alleges WSF has implemented a new policy and procedure covering employees’ accumulation of compensatory time for holidays and overtime (Rules 10 and 24), without negotiating with the Union. On 1/19/10, the IBU and WSF participated in a settlement conference, but were unable to resolve the issue. MEC found it necessary to cancel the 2/16/10 hearing date for Case 2-10 and use it to reschedule the hearing in Case 15-09. The 2/2/10 Answer filing deadline was also cancelled. On 6/10/10, WSF filed its Answer to the Complaint. Commissioner Cox was reassigned as Examiner. On 6/17/10, IBU Counsel requested the 6/24/10 hearing be continued. An unavoidable conflict arose for two key witnesses. WSF did not oppose the request. Examiner Cox cancelled the 6/24/10 hearing date. The hearing has been continued to 12/6/10.
MEC Case No. 3-10
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint (converted to a
grievance) filed 10/6/09 in which IBU charges WSF with discouraging union
membership, refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU alleges WSF unilaterally
implemented a new payroll overpayment procedure.
By phone on 3/2/10, the parties notified the MEC that they had agreed to convert
this matter to a grievance. On 4/21/10, Arbitrator Cox conducted the
hearing. MEC received the transcript on 5/4/10. Briefs were timely filed—both
IBU’s and WSF’s were received on 7/9/10. On
9/10/10, MEC entered Decision and Award, Dec. No. 589-MEC.
MEC Case No. 7-10
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 11/5/09 in which IBU charges WSF with interference and refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU alleges that WSF has failed to abide by Rule 3.04/single day vacation hours. On 3/12/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Commissioner Cox. They were unable to reach agreement on the issue. Due to a scheduling conflict on 5/4/10, Hearing Examiner Warren cancelled the 6/9/10 hearing and 5/26/10 answer deadline. On 6/16/10, WSF filed its Answer to the Complaint. The 6/30/10 hearing was cancelled due to AAG Slown’s illness. The hearing has been rescheduled for 12/16/10.
MEC Case No. 8-10
MM&P v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 12/21/09 in which MM&P charges WSF with refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU alleges WSF failed to adhere to the terms of the memorandum of understanding which provided for an agreement to negotiate and arbitrate a replacement for the Dispatch By Seniority program if either party elected to terminate that agreement. On 5/12/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Chairman Swanson; the issue was not resolved. (The arbitration decision has not been issued yet.) On 6/3/10, the parties jointly requested the 6/17 hearing be postponed while the parties await an interest arbitration decision, expected out by 6/18. Hearing Examiner Cox granted the request. The 6/17 hearing was cancelled, as well as the 6/3 answer filing date. The parties received Arbitrator Ford’s decision on 6/20/10; a petition for reconsideration has been filed. On 7/23/10, the parties reported that Arbitrator Ford denied the Petition for Reconsideration and Motion to Stay Implementation of her Award. MM&P and WSF plan to discuss implementation of the interim process contained in the Award. On 9/24/10, AAG Slown reported the interim process goes into effect with the fall schedule. The parties are scheduled to bargain this issue during the week of 9/27.
MEC Case No. 9-10
IBU v. WSF (Keith Hunt)—Grievance filed 1/27/10 in which IBU alleges WSF failed to pay Keith Hunt travel time and mileage for days worked in Anacortes in the summer of 2009. On 3/12/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Commissioner Cox. On 5/21/10, Jay Ubelhart reported that he communicated with the grievant and IBU intends to proceed to hearing. On 7/12/10, Jerry Holder requested the 7/16/10 hearing be continued, due to a problem with a witness. IBU did not object. Arbitrator Swanson granted the request; the 7/16 hearing was cancelled. The hearing has been rescheduled for 1/6/11.
MEC Case No. 11-10
Jonathan Pearson v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 2/12/10 in which Mr. Pearson charges WSF with interference, domination, discouraging union membership, discrimination, and refusal to bargain related to Mr. Pearson’s termination. Initially, the Commission decided to hold this matter in abeyance until Case 12-10 was resolved. However, the parties agreed to participate in a joint settlement conference for the two cases. A joint settlement conference is scheduled for Case 12-10 and 11-10 on 9/28/10.
MEC Case No. 12-10
Jonathan Pearson v. MM&P—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 2/16/10 in which Mr. Pearson charges WSF with restraint, coercion; causing employer discrimination; refusal to bargain/failure to represent (Termination). On 5/12/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Chairman Swanson. The matter was not resolved; however Mr. Pearson and MM&P are in the process of exchanging additional information. MEC received MM&P’s Answer to the Complaint on 5/20/10. On 5/21/10, MEC received a joint request from MM&P and Mr. Pearson to postpone the 6/1 hearing, consolidate this case with Case 11-10 and schedule another settlement conference. WSF objected to consolidation. Hearing Examiner Warren has cancelled the 6/1/10 hearing. A joint settlement conference is scheduled for Case 12-10 and 11-10 on 9/28/10.
MEC Case No. 13-10
OPEIU Local 8 v. WSF—Petition for Clarification of Existing Bargaining Unit, specifically vessel work order manager position. On 4/23/10, AAG Slown noted that because the position in question is now represented by IFPTE Local 17, that union should be included as a necessary party. MEC contacted IFPTE Local 17. Vince Oliveri will represent Local 17 in the MEC proceedings. The 7/28/10 hearing date was cancelled as Mr. Oliveri was not available. On 5/21/10, AAG Slown reported that he recently learned that some duties now in the Vessel Work Order Manager position were originally from a position represented by WFSE a year or two ago. He suggested that MEC may want to contact that union about inclusion in the case. MEC staff contacted the representative for WFSE. As of 6/2/10, WFSE had not determined whether or not it wanted to be involved. On 6/7/10, OPEIU, IFPTE Local 17 and WSF participated in a settlement conference with Chairman Swanson. Local 17 and OPEIU are still discussing the issue. DOP is to provide them further information. On 7/23/10, OPEIU requested the 8/16/10 hearing be postponed. Neither WSF nor Local 17 objected. Hearing Officer Cox granted the request. The 8/16/10 hearing has been cancelled. The hearing has been rescheduled for 11/16/10.
MEC Case No. 14-10
MEBA v. WSF —Unfair labor practice complaint filed 3/17/10 in which MEBA charges WSF with refusal to bargain. Specifically MEBA alleges WSF unilaterally implemented a Key Box System without notice to or bargaining with the Union. MEBA’s complaint included notice to the Commission that it intends to file a motion for temporary relief. On 4/12/10, the parties requested that the 4/15/10 settlement conference be cancelled. WSF needs more time to provide information MEBA requested. The parties negotiated the key box issue on 4/23 with another matter. Mediator Swanson cancelled the 4/15/10 settlement conference for Case 14-10. Reports on 7/23/10 and 9/24/10 indicate the parties are continuing discussions on this issue.
MEC Case 15-10
MEBA v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 3/26/10 in which MEBA charges WSF with refusal to bargain. Specifically MEBA alleges WSF has decided that unlicensed engine room personnel—Oilers and Wipers—should not be allowed to have parking spaces at the Bainbridge Island Terminal. On 7/14/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Mediator Cox, but were unable to resolve the issue. They intend to continue discussing. During MEC’s 7/23/10 public meeting, Karol Kingery, MEBA, requested the 9/2 hearing be converted to a settlement conference. AAG Slown did not object. Hearing Examiner Warren granted the request. The 9/2 hearing and 8/19 date for WSF to answer the complaint have been cancelled. On 9/2/10, the parties engaged in further settlement discussions with Mediator Cox. The matter is not yet resolved; however MEBA intends to communicate with IBU regarding a possible agreement for use of a parking space. As of 9/24/10, MEBA and IBU are still discussing.
MEC Case No. 16-10
IBU v. WSF (Pascual)—Grievance filed 4/19/10 in which IBU alleges WSF restricted Elmer Pascual’s bumping/bidding on OS positions, in violation of the contract. On 4/26/10, MEC received a copy of a letter from Jerry Holder to IBU asserting that the request for arbitration is untimely. On 6/15/10, IBU responded to Mr. Holder’s letter. On 9/15/10, the parties participated in a settlement conference with Mediator Cox; they made significant progress. They agreed to use the 10/14 hearing date for a settlement conference in Case 17-10. MEC will reschedule another settlement conference and hearing date for Case 16-10. The settlement conference has been continued to 10/13/10 and the hearing to 12/13/10.
MEC Case No. 17-10
IBU v. WSF (Hannam)—Grievance filed 4/20/10 in which IBU alleges WSF did not pay Hannam overtime for working during her vacation. On 4/26/10, MEC received a copy of a letter from Jerry Holder to IBU asserting that the request for arbitration is untimely. On 6/15/10, IBU responded to Mr. Holder’s letter. This matter was scheduled for settlement conference on 9/15/10 along with Case 16-10. Because discussion of 16-10 took most of the day, the parties ran out of time to discuss Case 17-10. IBU and WSF agreed to continue the 17-10 settlement conference to 10/14/10 (formerly hearing date in 16-10). The settlement conference is continued to 10/14/10; the hearing remains scheduled for 11/2/10.
MEC Case No. 19-10
Christopher Johnson v. MEBA & WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 5/17/10 in which Mr. Johnson charges breach of duty of fair representation/discipline. Specifically Mr. Johnson alleges MEBA acted with restraint and coercion and WSF interfered. A settlement conference is scheduled for 9/30/10.
MEC Case No. 1-11
IBU v. WSF—Unfair labor practice complaint filed 9/13/10 in which IBU charges WSF interference, refusal to bargain. Specifically IBU charges WSF with change in deck department standing orders. Forwarded to Commissioners for review. On 9/22/10, Dennis Conklin, IBU, notified MEC that the parties have reached an agreement on this matter; IBU withdrew the complaint.
MEC Case No. 2-11
IBU v. WSF—Grievance filed 9/14/10 in which IBU alleges WSF reduced OS relief positions. Settlement conference and hearing are to be scheduled.
MEC Case No. 3-11
IBU v. WSF—Grievance filed 9/14/10 in which IBU alleges WSF violated the 9/09 elimination of touring watches MOU (limitation on flexing shifts). Settlement conference and hearing are to be scheduled.
STATUS OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING 2011-2013
FASPAA................................ Negotiations began in May. The parties were scheduled for interest arbitration on 8/11 and 8/12 before Arbitrator Sylvia Skratek. On 8/3/10, MEC received the lists of disputed issues/final proposals from the parties. On 8/6, MEC issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration. Apparently the parties reached agreement and cancelled arbitration.
IBU........................................ Negotiations began in February. IBU declared impasse on 6/9/10. On 6/15/10, Jerry Holder requested a mediator be appointed. MEC contacted the FMCS. The parties met with appointed mediator, Gary Hattal, on 7/7 and 7/9/10. On 7/12/10, IBU submitted its list of remaining disputed issues/final proposals to MEC. WSF filed its list/proposals on 7/16/10. On 7/22/10, the Commission issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration . The parties were in dispute over the impasse items. Interest arbitration was set for 8/2-8/6/10 before Arbitrator Sylvia Skratek. On 7/27, the MEC conducted a hearing on disputed final impasse issues for interest arbitration. On 7/29, MEC entered Decision Amending Final Impasse issues for 2011-2013 Interest Arbitration, Decision No. 586-MEC. Arbitrator Skratek issued her award on 9/22/10.
............................................... On 8/20/10, WSF filed a Petition for Judicial Review of MEC Decision 586 (MEC IMP 2-10) in Thurston County Superior Court (#10-2-01898-8). Judge Paula Casey is assigned and a status conference is scheduled for 11/19/10. MEC delivered a certified copy of the record to the Court on 9/17/10.
MEBA................................... Negotiations began in June. The parties have reached a tentative agree-ment on a few items; next session is 8/4/10. MEBA counsel advised the MEC that the parties have agreed to exchange final proposals on impasse issues in arbitration on 8/10/10. Interest arbitration was scheduled 8/17-8/20/10 before Arbitrator Elizabeth Ford. On 8/13/10, MEC issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration. Arbitrator’s Award is expected 9/27/10.
MM&P.................................. Negotiations began in April. As of 7/20/10, the parties were at impasse. On 7/30 and 8/2, MEC received the list of remaining disputed issues/final proposals from each of the parties. Interest arbitration was scheduled for 8/16-20/10 before Arbitrator Timothy Williams. On 8/5/10, MM&P objected to WSF’s submittal of Rule 8.06 for certification for interest arbitration. On 8/5, WSF filed a response; MM&P replied to WSF’s letter on 8/6. On 8/13, the Commission issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration with a “conditional certification” regarding the section in dispute. On 8/27/10, the Commission conducted a certification hearing. On 8/31/10, MEC entered Decision Denying Certification of Rule 8.06 for 2011-13 Interest Arbitration, Dec. 588-MEC. Arbitrator Williams issued his Award on 9/23/10 (both deck officers’ and watch supervisors’ contracts).
............................................... On 9/17/10, WSF filed a petition for Judicial Review of MEC Decision No. 588 (MEC IMP 3-11) in Thurston County Superior Court (No. 10-2-02109-1). Judge Paula Casey has been assigned and a status conference scheduled for 1/7/11.
Oper. Watch Superv’s......... Negotiations began in February. On 8/2/10, MEC received the list of remaining disputed issues/final proposals from each of the parties. Interest arbitration was scheduled for 8/16-20/10 before Arbitrator Timothy Williams. On 8/11, MEC issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration.
Metal Trades........................ On 8/9/10, MEC received the list of remaining disputed issues/final proposals from each of the parties. Interest arbitration was scheduled for 8/25-26 before Arbitrator Jane Wilkinson. On 8/18/10, MEC issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration. Arbitrator Wilkinson issued her Award on 9/16/10.
OPEIU................................... Negotiations began in May. On 8/23/10, MEC received the parties’ outstanding disputed issues/final proposals. Interest arbitration was scheduled for 8/30-31. On 8/25/10, MEC issued a Certification of Issues for Interest Arbitration. Arbitrator Lumbley issued his Award on 9/23/10.
SEIU...................................... Negotiations began in June. The parties have a collective bargaining agreement TA’d. On 8/20/10, MEC received confirmation that the parties have no outstanding issues they are seeking to advance to interest arbitration.
OFM/LRO Negotiator Jerry Holder: IBU, MM&P, Operations Watch Supervisors, Metal Trades
OFM/LRO Negotiator Glenn Frye: FASPAA, MEBA, OPEIU, SEIU
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
ESSB 6503 – Furlough Bill
The MEC office was closed from 12noon-5pm on the afternoons of August 4 and September 1 in compliance with the state furlough bill. The next furlough afternoon will be October 6, 2010.
Travel Expense Review
MEC’s travel policy requires the Commissioners to review all travel expenses for all employees in the agency every 6 months. All the Commissioners have now reviewed January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010. Commissioner Warren moved the travel expenses be accepted and Commissioner Cox seconded the motion. The January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2010 travel expenses were approved.
2011-13 Biennial Budget Request
The MEC’s 2011-13 biennial budget was submitted to the Office of Financial Management on September 1. The state general fund reductions were 6.3%, but we received word on 9/23/10 that transportation agencies will have to make special budget reductions: the MEC’s budget reduction will be 12%, which is $51,000. Our revised “reduction” budget must be submitted to OFM by October 15, 2010. This brings the MEC back to the ’03-’05 budget level.
Cedar River Group Consultants
On August 24 Kathy Scanlan of the Cedar River Group contacted the MEC about a report they are preparing for the Joint Transportation Committee of the Washington State Legislature, the purpose of which is to compare MEC’s and PERC’s processes. Ms. Scanlan wanted to meet with MEC to discuss the draft. On August 31, she and Blair Scanlan came to Olympia where Linda and Kathy reviewed the report and made a number of suggested changes which were then incorporated into the report.
Budget Challenges
Defense for appeals of MEC decisions by WSF is having a severe impact on MEC’s budget. The entire 2-year budgeted amount for attorney general fees has already been exhausted defending these appeals. Because another appeal was filed on Friday, September 17, other portions of MEC’s budget will have to be cut to pay the attorney general fees to defend this new appeal.
Comments by Commissioner Warren
I’m going to take the opportunity today to officially announce my resignation as a Marine Employees’ Commissioner. I informed the labor folks a couple of months ago that it was my intent to do so. I did not make an official announcement at that time to give them some opportunity to think about it, to think about somebody who can replace me, not that I think I am replaceable. Somebody has to step into these shoes.
I had a couple of reasons for doing so. The first was the increasing amount of snide comments that Gordon Baxter, my better half, was receiving behind the scenes, implying that my participation as an MEC Commissioner, because of my relationship with him, constituted some kind of bias on my part. I take strong exception to those accusations. Gordon is a contract lobbyist, not an employee for any of the labor organizations, and the two of us have never allowed our work over all these years to interfere with what the other one is doing. The second reason was the increasing difficulty with my schedule as a full-time union negotiator to have time to deal with the MEC matters.
I think I have unique experience that I have brought here: not only do I have the NLRB background, but I have active participation on a day-to-day basis in processing grievances and participating in negotiations on behalf of organized labor and that is the insight that I bring to the MEC. And that’s my charge, as labor appointee, as an MEC Commissioner, but in addition to my day-to-day responsibilities for the Teamsters, it is my intent to run for delegate to the Teamster Convention which is coming up this next year and that would take me out of the opportunity to be available for MEC matters for 3-4 months.
So the combination of the increasing pressure behind the scenes and my increasing workload, I had to step down from this position and the timing seemed right. I have agreed to stay on until the end of the year in order to complete the matters I had on my plate as well as give labor some time to replace me.
After my decision to step down, I was assigned to hear an issue regarding whether or not something should be submitted to interest arbitration. I led the way on our internal discussions and was scheduled to be the hearing officer on that matter. The state attorney general’s office requested I recuse myself because of an appearance of bias due to my relationship with Gordon. Due to the time sensitivity of the issue surrounding negotiations, I agreed to recuse myself, but make no mistake, I did not concede the position of the state as valid. My resignation is unrelated to the unwarranted and unfounded attack on me and in my opinion, that attack was directed at Gordon. I was being used as a proxy and I consider that to be incredibly sexist on the part of the state and I do not believe the same would have happened if the roles were reversed and I were a male Commissioner and Gordon was a female lobbyist. I had already decided to resign. I choose not to expend the small amount of MEC resources remaining to defend me and my relationship with Gordon.
I do want organized labor to be cautious—this is partially an attack on the very nature of my role on the MEC. I am your representative and it is my job to represent your interests and the very nature of that role was attacked by the state, in my view. I don’t intend to go quietly in the night; I am not one to do that. I can guarantee you that if the state thought they were going to extract Gordon out of his role as a lobbyist for the unions by an attack on me, he is not going anywhere. I will make myself available to testify on behalf of organized labor at the upcoming legislative session if there any attacks, trying to eliminate the MEC. I ask the state to do the right thing. It is in your interest to continue the MEC, not just in labor’s interest. You have people that are experienced in dealing with these issues with your contracts and you will lose that if it goes to PERC. I would also challenge the state, that if you intend to ask that I recuse myself for future proceedings, do it now, because there are several things on my plate. And if you are going to ask me to recuse myself, let’s give the parties the opportunity to find another way of dealing with those matters, rather than wait until the last minute and then send me a letter accusing me of bias.
In closing, I appreciate the opportunity I have been given. I’ve been honored to represent labor on the MEC. I believe we fulfill an important role and I believe it’s cost effective. I will do what I can to seek continued existence of the MEC. Commissioner Callahan, head of PERC, I worked with at the NLRB. The labor community is a small world. I can guarantee you she is no pushover for either side and is doing everything she can to tighten up PERC procedures and make them a little more parallel to the NLRB.
In closing, it has been an honor and a pleasure working with Commissioner Swanson, who is a legend in our community. I have appreciated working alongside Commissioner Sullivan in the time that we had together and I have also enjoyed getting to know and work alongside Commissioner Cox. They are both wonderful men who do a great job for you and I hope that would be recognized in the future. Thank you for my time and getting to know you all and deal with your issues.
Chairman Swanson’s Response
Obviously, Commissioner, anyone who knows you, and knows your history, knows that your ethics, your integrity, your honor are unquestionable. I wasn’t aware of what you were going to say, but you are, and have been, an extremely valuable asset, and certainly will continue to be until you leave us, and anything you aspire to do in the future I know you will continue to function with the utmost integrity and credibility and intelligence. Certainly for Jack and me it has been a great pleasure and will continue to be a great pleasure not only to work with you, but to know you. I am sorry to see that this thing has developed the way it has, but I can appreciate your busy schedule.
The unions are getting beat up everywhere. The economy has changed the whole dynamic. I have a lot of arbitrations outside the MEC and I see some of the things going on in the workplace and they are scary, both for labor and management. The anger, instability, fear, and apprehension has created a very, very troublesome relationship that I have never seen all my years of labor relations, and that’s a very long time. As a matter of fact, I was looking at an invitation I had and it was for breakfast with Abraham Lincoln!
The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 a.m.
Next meeting: Friday, October 22, 2010, 10:00 a.m., Rainier Conference Room, 4th Floor, Washington State Ferries Offices, 2901 3rd Avenue, Seattle