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

CBA's arbitration procedure.

19
             

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

5. Other Arguments

The union finally argues that language in the preamble to the CBA prohibits the

district from using a notice ofnonrenewal to trump an employee's grievance. It directs

our attention to language that speaks of the district and the union being "committed to the

development of a trusting, respectful environment where the participation of all school

employees in the work of improving student learning is encouraged and expected" and to,

e.g., "a strong commitment to ... refrain from making judgments until we have a clear

understanding of the issues involved [and] provide individuals with the opportunity to be

involved in those decisions that directly affect their work situation." CP at 33.

In construing a contract, we will not read the language of a preamble to contradict

the contract's specific provisions outlining the grievance process and imposing

limitations on which grievances may be arbitrated. Baton Rouge Oil & Chern. Workers

Union v. ExxonMobil Corp., 289 F.3d 373,377 (5th Cir. 2002) ("It is a fundamental

axiom of contract interpretation that specific provisions control general provisions."

(citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 203(c) ((981»).

Finally, the union argues that the district's reliance on a notice ofnonrenewal as a

basis for avoiding arbitration of grievances constitutes a violation of the district's duty of

good faith. In every contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Metro. Park Dist. ofTacoma v. Griffith, 106 Wn.2d 425,437, 723 P.2d 1093 (1986).