CASE PROCESSING PROCEDURES; LIMITATION PERIOD FOR FILING CHARGE – In General

Single Topic for Decision 2144M

View all topics for Decision 2144M

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

Charging party has the burden to allege a “clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice charge.” Mere legal conclusions are not sufficient to state a prima facie case. Where charging party claimed that the employer created a point system for absences, late calls or tardiness, reduced the level of benefits that employees would receive, and made changes to the merit pay policy, but failed to include facts setting forth the original policies or procedures and/or how the new procedures were different from the originals, the charge was insufficient to establish a prima facie case for illegal unilateral change. Charging party has the burden to allege a “clear and concise statement of the facts and conduct alleged to constitute an unfair practice charge.” Where charge alleged, without more, that the employer withdrew from tentative agreements, appeared at a meeting without looking at a previous proposal, and refused to discuss any wage proposal, charge was insufficient to establish a claim for surface bargaining. The allegations lack the clear and concise factual context necessary to establish an indicia of surface bargaining.