EMPLOYER DETERRENCE OR DISCOURAGEMENT – Defenses

Single Topic for Decision 2795E

View all topics for Decision 2795E

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

The Board found that earlier unfair practices by other charter schools affiliated with the charter management organization, which were committed in response to the union’s organizing efforts, including interfering with protected rights by calling law enforcement to stop union handbilling and by directing an employee and a union organizer to leave school premises, interfering with the union’s rights by failing to respond to its request to meet and discuss a fair and neutral organizing process, and denying union organizers access to a school campus and threatening a teacher because of her protected activity on behalf of the union, further undercut the charter schools’ affirmative defense. While the Board would still reach the same outcome if these unfair practices had not occurred, they are additional relevant evidence regarding motive, further suggesting that the charter schools sent the e-mails not because of any legitimate business necessity but as part of their ongoing efforts to squelch the union’s organizing campaign. (pp. 73-74.)