- - - - - - - - - - - - -
September 9, 1971
Honorable Christopher T. Bayley
King County Court House
Seattle, Washington 98104
Attention: !ttMr. Norman K. Maleng
Chief Civil Deputy
Cite as: AGLO 1971 No. 104 (not official)
We acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 2, 1971, requesting our opinion on the following questions:
"1. Is a union shop provision valid and enforceable in a county or municipality which does not operate under a civil service type system?
"2. If your answer to question No. 1 is in the affirmative, is a union shop clause valid and enforceable in a county such as King which operates under a civil service type system?"
In regard to your first question, our opinion remains as set forth in AGO 57-58 No. 228 [[to Prosecuting Attorney, Kittitas County on November 19, 1958]]and our opinion to your predecessor dated December 9, 1968, both of which you have referred to in your letter. Accord, letter dated June 10, 1969, to the Pierce county prosecuting attorney, wherein the current attorney general confirmed these opinions of his predecessor.
In so far as your second question is concerned, I am enclosing herewith a copy of our letter dated January 14, 1969, to the Board of Trustees of Olympic Community College wherein we dealt with the relationship between a union security clause and a civil service system in the context of certain employees of this particular community college. Notably, this 1969 opinion was the forthcoming opinion to which we had reference in our December 9, 1968, opinion to the then King county prosecuting attorney.
[[Orig. Op. Page 2]]
It is hoped that the foregoing will be of assistance to you in finalizing your proposed opinion to the King county executive on the foregoing questions.
Very truly yours,
FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Philip H. Austin
Deputy Attorney General