EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; DISCRIMINATION – Burden of Proof; Evidence
Single Topic for Decision 1945E
Full Decision Text (click on the link to view): Full Text
501.02000 – Burden of Proof; Evidence
Contents of a letter to parents did not directly address any issues relating to the teachers’ interests as employees. The teachers did not state how their complaints impacted their working conditions, or how their concerns would advance their interests as employees. Without such evidence, the Board found distribution of the letter was not protected activity. The evidence fails to show how a letter was specifically and directly related to work conditions, treatment of teachers as employees, job cancellation or labor relations problems. As the letter did not state matters of legitimate concern to the employees as employees, the teachers did not engage in activity protected by EERA when they distributed the letter. The Board found there was insufficient evidence to support an inference that a charter school was unlawfully motivated to discriminate against three teachers because of their participation in protected union organization activities. There was insufficient evidence to show a charter school was unlawfully motivated to discriminate against three teachers because of their expressed intent to form and join a union. Accordingly, the Board concluded the Association did not sustain its burden of proof that the charter school discriminated or retaliated against three teachers for their participation in protected activity.