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

Single Topic for Decision 2747M

View all topics for Decision 2747M

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

To establish a prima facie interference case, a charging party must show that a respondent’s conduct tends to or does result in some harm to protected rights under our statutes. (Trustees of the California State University (Northridge) (2019) PERB Decision No. 2687-H, p. 3.) Once a charging party has established a prima facie case, the burden shifts to the employer. (Ibid.) The degree of harm dictates the employer’s burden. (Ibid.) If the harm is “inherently destructive” of protected rights, then the employer must show that the interference was caused by circumstances beyond its control and that no alternative course of action was available. (Id. at pp. 3-4.) On the other hand, for employer conduct that is not inherently destructive, the employer may attempt to justify its actions based on operational necessity. (Id. at p. 3.) In such cases, PERB will balance the employer’s asserted interests against the tendency to harm protected rights; if the tendency to harm outweighs the asserted business justification, PERB finds a violation. (Ibid.)