Decision 0659E – Los Angeles Unified School District

Although alleged interference with EERA rights by employer occurred at one school site, posting of remedial notice at all district's school sites is appropriate. Purpose of posting requirement is to inform all concerned in the District of activity found to be unlawful under the Act in order to provide guidance and prevent reoccurrence.

Viewing entire context, district unlawfully discouraged and interfered with bilingual education aides' seeking the assistance of their union where, in a state of anger, one of the principals made series of implied threats such as: she wanted them to come to her first with their problems before involving the union; asked why an employee had not come to her first before seeking union assistance; stated her desire that employees come directly to her with problems "because she didn't like them to go outside of her jurisdiction;" and called one employee a "troublemaker" for bringing in the union.

For the ALJ or the Board to consider an unalleged violation, one critical element is that the matter be fully litigated. An unalleged violation is not fully litigated, even though substantial evidence on the issue was presented by opposing parties, where the charging party stated during hearing that it would not pursue an independent violation on the unalleged conduct.

Even assuming the presence of unlawful motive on the part of the principal, she would have downrated education aide's performance evaluation in the absence of protected activity. Evaluation was identical to that recommended by a teacher overseeing employee's work who was not shown to evince unlawful motive or knowledge of exercise of protected rights.

Viewing entire context, district unlawfully discouraged and interfered with bilingual education aides' seeking the assistance of their union where, in a state of anger, one of the principals made series of implied threats such as: she wanted them to come to her first with their problems before involving the union; asked why an employee had not come to her first before seeking union assistance; stated her desire that employees come directly to her with problems "because she didn't like them to go outside of her jurisdiction;" and called one employee a "troublemaker" for bringing in the union.

While Board itself is free to consider the entire record and draw its own conclusions from the evidence presented, it will afford deference to an ALJ's findings of fact which incorporate credibility determinations. Deference is warranted here where one of two dramatically different versions of the same event was credited over the other and where the transcript provides little, if any, basis upon which to depart from the ALJ's conclusion.