On April 11, 2024, Lieutenant Mark Tennancour and Dan Thenell, the attorney for Franklin County Corrections Guild/Washington Fraternal Order of Police, organized a lunch meeting during a mandatory training session for corrections staff of Franklin County, Washington. The meeting was approved by Sheriff James D. Raymond. At the time, corrections deputies, corporals, and sergeants employed by Franklin County had been affiliated with Teamsters Local 839 since April 2020. The election period for a pending change of representation began three months earlier. After the first election resulted in a 16-16 tie on February 29, 2024, the Representation Case Administrator notified the parties that a runoff election would occur.
At the lunch meeting, Thenell provided pizza and delivered what was described as “a commercial for the FOP,” promoting the benefits of the FOP, including its legal defense fund. Commander Marcus Conner also participated, sharing his positive experiences with the FOP’s legal defense fund during an on-duty shooting incident.
Teamsters Secretary-Treasurer Russell Shjerven testified that, in the wake of the April 11 lunch meeting, four or five bargaining unit members contacted Teamsters and revoked their dues authorizations. Prior to April 11, per Shjerven, Teamsters “had always had 100 percent dues enrollment from the bargaining unit.”
The next election was held from May 14 to June 5, 2025. The FOP won the runoff by a narrow margin (21-19). Teamsters and two employees filed objections to the runoff election, alleging that two employees did not receive their ballots in time to vote. Teamsters also filed an unfair labor practice complaint against Franklin County, alleging employer interference and unlawful assistance to the FOP during the election period. Although Conner disclaimed any intent to influence the election, PERC found the employer’s actions demonstrated a preference for the FOP. Notably, Teamsters had been denied similar access to the workplace for years, despite a prior arbitration award and court orders mandating such access.
PERC concluded that Franklin County violated RCW 41.56.140(2) by unlawfully assisting the Guild and RCW 41.56.140(1) by interfering with employees’ rights. The Commission also found the employer violated WAC 39125-140(3) by showing preference for the FOP during the election period.
PERC emphasized that the employer’s actions disturbed the “laboratory conditions” necessary for a fair election. “Employers must refrain from conduct and speech that employees can reasonably perceive to be a threat or promise associated with some chapter 41.56 RCW-protected activity.” The Examiner noted the timing of the meeting — six weeks after a tied election — and the employer’s history of restricting Teamsters’ access as evidence of unlawful intent.
As a remedy, PERC ordered Franklin County to cease its unfair labor practices, remain neutral in any future election, and provide Teamsters an opportunity to hold a similar lunch meeting with bargaining unit members before a rerun election. Franklin County was also required to post and read a notice of the violations and pay Teamsters’ reasonable attorney fees and costs. PERC rejected Teamsters’ request for a bargaining order, finding it disproportionate, but vacated the runoff election and ordered a new election to ensure employees’ free choice. The Examiner justified the attorney fees award by citing the employer’s “pattern of disdainful disregard for its obligations under state collective bargaining law” and the frivolity of its defenses.
Franklin County, Decision 14111 (PECB 2025).