EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; THREATS OR PROMISES – Promise of or Withholding of Benefits

Single Topic for Decision 2632M

View all topics for Decision 2632M

Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text

In Carlsbad, the Board explained that employer conduct will be deemed “inherently destructive” of protected rights, if its “natural and probable consequence” would be to discourage the exercise of such rights. The District’s decision to grant longevity differentials only to unrepresented employees not only tended to interfere with protected activity but was so significant that its natural and probable consequence was to interfere with Association and employee rights. By explicitly distinguishing between represented and unrepresented employees and insisting on its intent to compensate the latter group at a higher level, the District’s position inherently discourages union activity. Accordingly, under Carlsbad, the District’s conduct may be excused only on proof that it was occasioned by circumstances beyond the District’s control and that no alternative course of action was available.