Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 897239.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/897239.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,800 chars

7 A "Successor Employer" is "the new hospitality or transportation employer that

succeeds the predecessor employer in the provision of substantially similar services
within the City," and a "Predecessor Employer" is "the hospitality or transportation
employer that provided substantially similar services within the City prior to the
successor employer." SEATAC MUNICIPAL CODE 7.45.010(L), (I) (emphasis added).

27
  FilaFoods,
LLC
 v.City
       
ofSeaTac
89723-9

new contract, the successor employer will hire qualified retention
employees by seniority within each job classification.

C. Retention Period. A successor employer shall not discharge a
retention employee without just cause during the initial ninety (90) day
period of his/her employment.

SEATAC MUNICIPAL CODE 7.45.060. The trial court held that the NLRA does not

preempt these provisions. We affirm the trial court in this respect.

Filo Foods argues that Proposition 1's worker-retention provisions are

preempted under the Machinists doctrine because the "U.S. Supreme Court recognizes

a successor employer's right to operate its business in the manner in which it best sees

fit" in terms of its hiring and firing decisions. Filo Foods's Opening Br. at 40. But

the United States Supreme Court cases Filo Foods relies on do not support its

argument. These cases involved application of the National Labor Relation Board's

(NLRB) successorship doctrine, which holds that if, under the doctrine's fact-

intensive case law, the employer is found to be a successor, then the employer has a

duty to bargain with the predecessor's union. See Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns

Int'l Sec. Servs., Inc., 406 U.S. 272, 92 S. Ct. 1571, 32 L. Ed. 2d 61 (1972); Howard