EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE WITH, RESTRAINT, OR COERCION OF EMPLOYEES – In General; Standards

Single Topic for Decision 2283E

View all topics for Decision 2283E

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

A prima facie case of interference is established by allegations that an employer’s conduct tends to or does result in some harm to employee rights under our statutes. (Carlsbad Unified School District (1979) PERB Decision No. 89.) Employees have the right to engage in activities protected by EERA, viz., forming, joining and participating in activities of an employee organization for the purpose of representation. (EERA, § 3543.5(a).) Employer conduct which tends to or does result in some harm to an employee’s exercise of these rights interferes therewith in violation of the EERA. (EERA, § 3543.5(a).) Charging party alleges that a memo criticized those employees who, with charging party, had joined together to file through counsel a grievance and complaint seeking to enforce workplace rights. Such alleged conduct by the District’s assistant superintendent for personnel is attributable to the District. Employees reading the memo would understand the District to be hostile to their participation in activity protected by the EERA. We conclude this would result in at least some harm to employee rights. Thus, we conclude that the allegation states prima facie an instance of impermissible interference with employee rights.