EMPLOYER DISCRIMINATION; EVIDENCE OF UNLAWFUL MOTIVATION; NEXUS – Cursory Investigation

Single Topic for Decision 2804E

View all topics for Decision 2804E

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

The Board found that the allegations in the amended charge established both the inadequate investigation and disproportionate punishment nexus factors. The school district’s one-sided investigation of Charging Party’s alleged time theft consisted of comparing Charging Party’s texts saying she would be late or absent with her entries in the school district’s timekeeping system. Based on this investigation, the school district proposed to terminate Charging Party for 36 alleged instances of time theft. The school district never interviewed Charging Party about any of these instances; she first became aware of the allegations when she was served with the Notice of Intent to Discipline. Then, based on Charging Party’s presentation at her Skelly hearing, the Skelly officer found 25 of the 36 alleged instances were unfounded. The Board found that this suggests that if the school district adequately investigated to learn the true facts, including interviewing Charging Party, it would have discovered it had no basis for 25 of the charges. The Board found that the school district’s failure to undertake this additional investigation supports an inference that it was not interested in obtaining evidence that might conflict with its desired result. (pp. 14-15.)

The Board noted that despite the Skelly officer dismissing two-thirds of the charges against Charging Party, the school district did not reduce the proposed discipline but instead proceeded to terminate Charging Party based on the remaining 11 charges. Although we cannot say based upon the allegations in the amended charge that termination was a disproportionate punishment for the remaining 11 charges, the school district’s persistence in terminating Charging Party’s employment despite the weakness of a large portion of its charges suggests that termination was a predetermined outcome to rid the school district of a known union activist. The Board found that this was another instance of inadequate investigation and disproportionate punishment nexus factors. (p. 16.)