Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 315223.cor.pdf

district's grounds for electing not to renew her contract. The union insists that it grieved

matters distinct from the district's evaluation of Ms. Easterling and her nonrenewal.

9
             

No. 31522-3-111
Spokane Sch. Dist. No. 81 v. Spokane Educ. Ass 'n

,
Both the original and amended grievances filed by the union stated that "[t ]he non­

renewal/non-retention of Nikki Easterling that is in the planning stages by the District is

what is being grieved." CP at 153,279. In this court, the union has wisely retreated from

this articulation of the grievance, conceding that by the express terms of the CBA, the

district's nonrenewal of Ms. Easterling's contract was grievable only through step three.

The trial court did not err in finding that the nonrenewal was not subject to arbitration.

B. Issues allegedly distinct from evaluation or nonrenewal

The union contends that it also grieved matters it claims are distinct from

evaluation and nonrenewal. Those allegedly distinct matters are the district's (I) alleged

violation of Ms. Easterling's right to progressive discipline, (2) alleged retaliation, (3)

procedural inconsistencies, and (4) failure to inform Ms. Easterling of her FMLA rights.

It argues that the fact that one matter included in a grievance might not be grievable

under the CBA (here, nonrenewal) should not exclude arbitration of other grievable

items. It cites North Beach Education Association v. North Beach School District No. 64,

31 Wn. App. 77, 639 P.2d 821 (1982) as support.

There is a significant difference between this case and North Beach, which turned

on statutory constraints on an arbitrator's authority rather than on the terms of a CBA.