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

Single Topic for Decision 2610H


View all topics for Decision 2610H

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

400.00000 – EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE, RESTRAINT, COERCION; EMPLOYER INTERFERENCE WITH, RESTRAINT, OR COERCION OF EMPLOYEES
400.01000 – In General; Standards

Employer communications to employees and their representative which misrepresent or omit material information about pending employment decisions may state an interference violation, separate from an alleged bargaining violation, because they would reasonably tend to discourage the representative from requesting negotiations, filing a grievance, or taking other action necessary to represent the employees’ or the organization’s interests. While this theory of liability overlaps factually with the inadequate notice element of UC-AFT’s unilateral subcontracting theories, it is not purely derivative of the unilateral change allegations. Employer conduct allegedly constituting a unilateral change may also state a prima facie case of reprisal or interference with protected rights, where it was allegedly undertaken for a discriminatory purpose or would reasonably tend to discourage protected activity. In such instances, establishing a bargaining violation is not necessary for proving up an independent interference or discrimination allegation. (pp. 67-68.)