HOUSE BILL REPORT

EHB 1273

BYRepresentatives R. King, Sayan, Winsley, Wang and Jones

Extending the effect of collective bargaining agreements.

House Committe on Commerce & Labor

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment.  (7)

      Signed by Representatives Wang, Chair; Cole, Vice Chair; Fisher, Jones, R. King, O'Brien and Sayan.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (2)

      Signed by Representatives Patrick and Walker.

House Staff:Chris Cordes (786-7117)

AS PASSED HOUSE FEBRUARY 11, 1988

BACKGROUND:

Under the public employees collective bargaining law, local government employees have the right to organize and designate their collective bargaining representatives.  Public employers and employee bargaining representatives are required to bargain in good faith, but the parties are not required to agree to a proposal or make a concession.

Generally, it is an unfair labor practice for an employer to make unilateral changes in wages or terms and conditions of employment during the existence of a labor contract or when collective bargaining is pending, without negotiating on these issues with the properly designated employee representative.  Under the National Labor Relations Act, however, an employer may be allowed to unilaterally implement the terms of the employer's last offer at the bargaining table if the employer and the union have reached bargaining impasse.  Recently, the Public Employment Relations Commission has applied this rule in cases involving state public employment.

In a 1985 case, the commission rejected the argument that unilateral implementation of changes in a mandatory bargaining subject, whether or not impasse is reached, is an unfair labor practice.  The commission held that the employer had not committed an unfair labor practice by implementing changed hours and working conditions, where the parties had bargained in good faith to genuine deadlock.

SUMMARY:

All of the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining agreement remain in effect after the termination date of the agreement until a new agreement is executed by the parties.  This provision does not apply to collective bargaining for port district employees.

Fiscal Note:      Requested January 18, 1988.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Sam Kinville, Washington State Council of County and City Employees;  Eugene St. John, Washington Public Employees Association; and Mike Ryherd, Joint Council of Teamsters.

House Committee - Testified Against:      Gary Lowe, Washington State Association of Counties;  Larry Swift, Washington State School Directors' Association;  Kathleen Collins, Association of Washington Cities; and Gordon Conable, Fort Vancouver Regional Library.

House Committee - Testimony For:    The use or threat of use of unilateral changes in wages or working conditions by a public employer when collective bargaining negotiations have reached impasse is destructive to the negotiation process.  Allowing unilateral implementation by the public employer while employees are not authorized to strike upsets the balance needed for fair negotiations.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      Many public employers are operating under severe financial distress.  Unilateral changes in wages or working conditions after bargaining has reached impasse may be economically necessary and may bring the parties back to negotiations.  Without this authority, labor contracts could be frozen at existing levels indefinitely.