Decision 0159Sb – State of California (Department of Transportation) (State Trial Attorneys Association)

An issue before the Board becomes moot when the essential nature of the complaint is lost due to some superseding conduct of the parties. Thus, an employer's decision to permit certain employees to receive mail at their work addresses did not moot dispute over whether or not the employer could deny union the right to use its internal mail system.

Board reverses hearing officer award of $300 to union in access case for expenses in developing a newsletter prototype. There is no evidence to support hearing officer conclusion that there were no other means of communication except a newsletter.

No favoritism found in State employer's rule restricting employee organization access to mail system. Hearing officer speculation about the disparate effects of the rule on various organizations is no substitute for evidence.

Employee organization has right to use State employer's internal mail system if it can demonstrate that the usual channels of communication with the employees in question are either ineffective or unreasonably difficult to utilize. No violation where union failed to demonstrate that alternate means were unavailable.

An otherwise valid no-solicitation rule will violate employee rights where discriminatory in scope or application. A rule treating union mail sent to employees at the work place different from other personal mail is discriminatory on its face. In the absence of evidence justifying the discrimination, the rule constitutes an interference with protected rights.