Clallam County v. Washington State Public Employment Relations Com'n, 7268-8-II

• Decision Date: 06 May 1986
• Docket Number: No. 7268-8-II,7268-8-II
• Citation: 43 Wn.App. 589,719 P.2d 140
• Parties: CLALLAM COUNTY, Respondent, v. WASHINGTON STATE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION, and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 589, Appellants.
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals

Page 589

43 Wn.App. 589

719 P.2d 140

CLALLAM COUNTY, Respondent, v. WASHINGTON STATE PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION, and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 589,

Appellants.

No. 7268-8-II.

Court of Appeals of Washington,

Division 2.

May 6, 1986.

Richard A. Heath, Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen., Olympia, Wash., for appellant state.

Herman L. Wacker, William H. Song, Davies, Roberts, Reid & Wacker, Seattle, Wash., for appellant Teamsters 589.

Michael D. Chinn, Deputy Pros. Atty., Port Angeles, Wash., for respondent.

ALEXANDER, Judge.

The Washington State Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 589 appeal the superior court's reversal of PERC's determination that Clallam County committed an unfair labor practice. We reverse.

Mark Baker began work for Clallam County as an appraiser-trainee in the County Assessor's Office on November 1, 1979 and was terminated by the county on October 22, 1980. On January 22, 1981, Baker's union, Teamsters Local 589 (the Union) filed a complaint with PERC alleging that Baker's discharge violated the provisions of RCW 41.56. A hearing examiner thereafter conducted a hearing on the matter and the transcript of that hearing revealed the following factual background to Baker's discharge.

Baker's educational background included graduation from Sequim High School third in his class, BS degree from the United States Military Academy, Master's degree from the University of Southern California, and studies toward a two-year degree in real estate at Peninsula Junior College. According to all accounts, Baker performed his duties for Clallam County satisfactorily with respect to the quality and quantity of his work. However, he was beset with a series of run-ins with his superiors that began soon after he commenced his employment with the county.

At the first of the year in 1980, Baker and his superiors disagreed over the interpretation of a vacation pay section of the Collective Bargaining Agreement in effect for Clallam County employees.

Baker interpreted the agreement to allow a person to schedule a vacation day concurrent with a holiday and receive double pay. ¹ Consequently, Baker submitted a written request to his superior to be allowed to take each of his vacation days on scheduled holidays. When Arleigh Linnell, Chief Appraiser in the County Assessor's Office, denied Baker's request, Baker replied that "that's the way the Union contract reads." Linnell then went to his superior, Lester Lancaster, the Clallam County Assessor, to discuss Baker's request. Linnell and Lancaster then called the Union to determine its interpretation of the agreement. The Secretary-Treasurer of the Union came to the Assessor's Office and explained to Baker that the section applied only if the holiday happened to fall within an employee's scheduled vacation time. Baker did not pursue this request any further.

Baker's next confrontation with his superiors grew out of the adoption of a Personnel Ordinance by the Clallam County Board of County Commissioners. The Ordinance, which was adopted on June 30, 1980, made it possible for appraiser-trainees, who met certain minimum qualifications, to become appraisers after a three-month probationary period. After Baker had completed all of the requirements for promotion, he checked his personnel file to make sure he was eligible to be promoted. He determined that he was, and thus expected to receive notice of his promotion. In early August, Baker still had not been promoted so he complained orally to Linnell. Linnell refused Baker's promotion request. Baker then drafted a written grievance and reviewed it with a Union representative. At this point, Baker set up a meeting with Lancaster, holding his written grievance in reserve pending his discussion with Lancaster. Two meeting dates passed before Lancaster actually met with Baker.

A meeting between Lancaster, Linnell, and Baker took place on August 11, 1980. After some discussion, Lancaster indicated that he would have to consider the matter before making a decision and that he would get back to Baker. Baker then reminded Lancaster of the 10-day time limit imposed on an employee for filing a grievance under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Lancaster told Baker not to worry about the deadline, and Baker said "fine," but that he would need assurance in writing. Lancaster then asked Baker, "[W]hy[,] isn't my word good enough? ..." Baker replied "[n]o, its not...." When asked why, Baker noted that "first off, you've made an appointment to see me and then not seen me which to me is violating your trust...." Lancaster then asked Baker if there was any other reason Baker did not trust him and Baker replied "yes" because a "honorable man would not have signed this year's re-evaluation ..." because the re-evaluation was "a piece of shit...." Baker went on to explain why he held this opinion, at which point Lancaster ordered Baker out of his office.

About one hour after the meeting, Linnell summoned Baker to his office and told Baker that Baker was violating hiring criteria because his car was not licensed in the state of Washington. Linnell also suggested to Baker that a person who does not trust his supervisor should look for another position.

On August 15, 1980 Baker was promoted to the position of Appraiser. At the same time, he received a letter of reprimand for his comments to Lancaster at the August 11 meeting.

Following this incident and until the event which resulted in his discharge, Baker went on with his job with only minor difficulty. At one point Baker signed up for and took a "Commercial I" test without the authority of his superiors. Baker was supposed to be taking a "Residential I" test, but he decided to take both tests and did well on both. Baker later requested permission from Linnell to take the "Commercial II" course. Linnell denied him permission, indicating that Baker could not take the course because Linnell had not even had a chance to take it. Despite this denial, Baker ordered the course material to be sent to him at his own expense. When Linnell discovered this, he expressed his disapproval to Lancaster.

The final incident occurred on October 21, 1980. Linnell previously had informed the appraisers that they must "get the [county] cars out of the parking lot on occasion so the Commissioners did not see them ..." Linnell also told the appraisers that he wanted a majority of the paperwork done in the field because "the Commissioners saw [them] in the office and it looked bad...." Baker indicated that he thought "in the field," which was not defined by a written or oral rule, meant outside the office.

Pursuant to his understanding of Linnell's instructions, Baker decided to spend October 21 doing paperwork at the Peninsula College Library rather than drive to his assigned area in the town of Forks and work in his car. Baker stated that other appraisers had used the college library, which is located about 5 minutes from the Courthouse, to do their paperwork. He indicated that he chose to work at the library because he had a great deal of paperwork and it was extremely awkward to attempt to do it in his automobile. In keeping with the edict to keep county cars out of sight of the Commissioners, Baker parked the car in the Playhouse Center parking lot which is surrounded by brush and is immediately adjacent to the college library. The car was well hidden and could not be seen from the road.

About mid-afternoon on that day, the sheriff's office noticed the county's car in the Playhouse parking lot and called the Assessor's Office to see if they knew anything about it. Linnell and Lancaster went to the parking lot to investigate and then removed the car, taking it back to the courthouse. When Baker finished his work for the day he came out and discovered the car was gone. Baker left, and later came back to see if the car had been returned. In the meantime, Linnell and Lancaster had returned the car and were waiting to see who would show up.

When Baker arrived at the car, Linnell ordered Baker back to the office. Baker then met with Linnell, Lancaster, and Baker's "lead man," William Corcoran. Baker attempted to offer an explanation, but Linnell stated that he had made up his mind and he told Baker that he was terminated for his misuse of the county vehicle.

Don Lane, the Union representative, indicated at the hearing that Linnell and Lancaster objected to Baker's "running to the Union all the time" with little problems he had in the office. William Corcoran testified that "in the field" means in your assigned re-evaluation area. Corcoran said that he did work at Peninsula College when it was within his assigned area. He also stated that he had told Baker not to park the county car right on the main street. Jack Witschger, a deputy assessor, testified that the internal policy of the Assessor's Office was to do paperwork in the office. Lancaster testified that one deputy assessor, who took a county car to his home during the day to do work, had not been fired.

Finally, a tape from a Clallam County Commissioner's hearing ² was introduced into evidence at the PERC hearing, and a portion of the transcription was read into the record. It revealed Linnell indicating to the Commissioners that the vacation pay request showed an unwillingness on Baker's part to accept supervision and was a fact, along with others, that led to his dismissal. ³

At the PERC hearing, Linnell attempted to clarify the meaning of his statements to the Commissioners by explaining that the vacation pay request was one of many little things that indicated an attitude problem with Baker. Linnell also emphasized that he was wrong when he told the Commissioners that Baker had taken the vacation problem to the Union. Further, Linnell noted that Baker was not fired after the August 11 insubordination incident because the Assessor's Office was...