FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY STATUTORY TRAINING PROGRAM - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 16
About This Presentation
Title:

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY STATUTORY TRAINING PROGRAM

Description:

Dep't of the Air Force, Grissom Air Force Base, Ind., ... Food & Nutrition Serv., Alexandria, Va., 61 FLRA 16 (2005); U.S. Dep't of the Air Force, ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:7
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 17
Provided by: SSp2
Learn more at: http://ifpte12.org
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY STATUTORY TRAINING PROGRAM


1
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITYSTATUTORY
TRAINING PROGRAM
  • Interference and Discrimination
  • Jean M. Perata
  • Deputy Regional Director
  • FLRA, S.F. Region
  • jperata_at_flra.gov 415.356.5000, ext. 2012

2
Interference The Legal Basis
  • 5 U.S.C. 7102 Employees Rights
  • Each employee shall have the right to form, join,
    or assist any labor organization, or to refrain
    from any such activity, freely and without fear
    of penalty or reprisal.

3
Examples of Protected Activity
  • Filing a grievance
  • Asserting a contractual right
  • Requesting union representation
  • Representing the union in a matter
  • Attending union meetings
  • Refusing to join a union
  • Executing a dues allotment
  • Testifying at an arbitration hearing
  • See U.S. Dep't of the Air Force, Aerospace
    Maintenance Regeneration Ctr., Davis Monthan
    Air Force Base, Tucson, Ariz., 58 FLRA 636
    (2003) U.S. Dept of Labor, Employment
    Training Admin., S.F., Cal., 43 FLRA 1036 (1992)

4
Free Speech Proviso
  • Personal opinions are protected - 5 U.S.C.
    7116(e)
  • The expression of any view, argument, opinion or
    the making of any statement which
  • (1) publicizes the fact of a representational
    election and encourages employees to exercise
    their right to vote in such election,
  • (2) corrects the record with respect to any
    false or misleading statement made by the person,
    or
  • (3) informs employees of the Governments policy
    relating to labor-management relations and
    representation,
  • Shall not, if the expression contains no threat
    or reprisal of force or promise or benefit or was
    not made under coercive conditions, (A)
    constitute an unfair labor practice under any
    provision of this chapter, or (B) constitute
    grounds for the setting aside of any election
    conducted under any provision of this chapter.

5
Interference by An Agency
  • It is a violation of 7116(a)(1) for an agency
    to interfere with, restrain or coerce an employee
    in the exercise by the employee of any right
    under the Statute.

6
Examples of this Conduct
  • Threatening employees with reprisal if they
    exercise their rights under the Statute.
    FEC, 6 FLRA 327 (1981)
  • Making implied threats against union
    representatives for assisting employees in filing
    and prosecuting grievances under the negotiated
    grievance procedure. U.S.
    Penitentiary, Florence, Colo., 52 FLRA 974 (1997)

7
Objective Standard
  • While the circumstances surrounding the making of
    the statement(s) are taken into consideration,
    the standard is not based on the subjective
    perceptions of the employee or on the intent of
    the management representative.
  • U.S. DOJ, Fed. Bureau of Prisons, FCI,
    Safford, Ariz., 59 FLRA 318 (2003) (citing Dept
    of the Air Force, Scott Air Force Base, Ill., 34
    FLRA 956 (1990)).

8
Discrimination Defined
  • 5 U.S.C. 7116(a)(2) It is an unfair labor
    practice for an Agency to encourage or discourage
    Union membership in a labor organization by
    discriminating in connection with hiring, tenure,
    promotion or other conditions of employment.5
    U.S.C. 7116(a)(4) It is an unfair labor
    practice for an Agency to discipline or otherwise
    discriminate against an employee because the
    employee has filed a complaint, affidavit, or
    petition, or has given any information or
    testimony under the Statute.

9
DISCRIMINATION
  • The same test is applied to cases alleging
    discrimination, pursuant to section 7116(a)(4) of
    the Statute, as to cases alleging discrimination
    as to section 7116(a)(2) of the Statute.
  • Dept of Veterans Affairs Medical Ctr., Brockton
    and West Roxbury, Mass., 43 FLRA 780 (1991)

10
Discrimination
  • Evidence must initially demonstrate a prima facie
    case-
  • Elements of a prima facie case
  • 1. Employee was engaged in protected activity
  • 2. Discriminatory action was taken against the
    employee and
  • 3. Employees protected activity was a motivating
    factor in the Agencys treatment of the employee.
  • Letterkenny Army Depot, 35 FLRA 113 (1990)
    (Letterkenny)

11
Letterkenny Factors
  • Was there protected activity?
  • Was the Agency aware of the protected activity?
  • Was there discriminatory action taken against
    employee?
  • How were other employees who were not engaged in
    protected activity treated?
  • Would the action have been taken in the absence
    of protected activity?
  • Is there evidence of anti-Union animus?
  • Was the protected activity a motivating factor in
    the discriminatory action?

12
If Action Was Motivated by Protected Activity
  • Under Letterkenny, even if the evidence shows a
    link between the protected activity and the
    action taken, no violation will be found if
  • There was a legitimate justification for the
    action and
  • The same action would have been taken even in the
    absence of the protected activity.

13
Pretext or Mixed Motive
  • If it can be shown that the reasons for taking
    the action are false or pretextual, then there is
    no legitimate justification for the action.
  • In cases of mixed motive (action based on both
    lawful and unlawful considerations) the decision
    is still based on whether there are legitimate
    reasons and the same action would have resulted,
    absent protected activity.

14
RELATED MATTER
  • What if management takes an action against an
    employee for what the employee did or said during
    a grievance meeting.
  • Is that lawful? What test should be applied in
    this situation?

15
Not All Conduct involving Protected Activity Is
Protected
  • Conduct that constitutes flagrant misconduct or
    otherwise exceeds the boundaries of protected
    activity loses its protection
  • U.S. Dept of Agriculture, Food Nutrition
    Serv., Alexandria, Va., 61 FLRA 16 (2005) U.S.
    Dep't of the Air Force, Aerospace Maintenance and
    Regeneration Ctr., Davis Monthan Air Force Base,
    Tucson, Ariz., 58 FLRA 636 (2003)

16
Flagrant Misconduct Factors To Consider
  • Place and subject matter of discussion
  • Whether an outburst was planned or impulsive
  • Whether conduct was provoked and
  • Nature of any intemperate language or conduct.
  • Dep't of the Air Force, Grissom Air Force Base,
    Ind.,
  • 51 FLRA 7 (1995)
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com