LawMemo       First in Employment Law 

LawMemo's reason for being: We publish Employment Law Memo - summaries of latest court decisions, one-click links to full text, three emails per week.   Try it. 

Home | Free Trial | Products & Prices | Feeds | Caselaw Database | Sample   
EEOC
| NLRB | Nat'l Arbitration Ctr | Supreme Court | Articles | Lawyers
Employment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101    
Employment Law Memo | NLRB Law Memo | Arbitration Law Memo

Quick Jump: 

NLRB Law Memo 
Also available by free emails

All Archives

« 10/09/2004 | Main | 10/29/2004 »

10/22/2004
by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

NLRB Law Memo 10/22/2004

by
LawMemo.Com - First in Employment Law

NLRB - Staff summarized 1 decision.

Holling Press, Inc., and Boncraft-Holling Printing Group f/k/a Boncraft, Inc. (3-CA-20229; 343 NLRB No. 45) Buffalo, NY Oct. 15, 2004.

Chairman Battista and Member Schaumber affirmed the administrative law judge's findings and dismissed the complaint allegation that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by discharging Catherine M. Fabozzi. Member Liebman dissented.

The Respondent suspended Fabozzi on June 26, 1996 and terminated her on July 2 for purportedly "attempt[ing] to coerce coworkers into corroborating an unsubstantiated charge of sexual harassment against one of [her] supervisors." The majority asserted that Fabozzi was not engaged in activity protected by Section 7 when she solicited a coworker to be a witness in support of her sexual harassment claim filed with a State agency. They found that Fabozzi's conduct, though concerted, was uniquely designed to advance her own cause, and thus, that it was not engaged in for the purposes of mutual aid or protection. Accordingly, the majority held that her termination was lawful.

Member Liebman would find, contrary to her colleagues, that the Respondent violated the Act by discharging Fabozzi. Citing Meyers Industries, 281 NLRB 882, 887 (1986), enfd. sub. nom. Prill v. NLRB, 835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987), cert. denied 487 U.S. 1205 (1988), Member Liebman wrote that this was a textbook example of "circumstances, where individual employees seek to initiate or to induce or to prepare for group action." She said: "Whatever the reason, the majority decision today places an arbitrary roadblock in front of employees who join together to resist unlawful discrimination. At bottom, it encourages victims of sexual harassment to remain silent. I dissent."

(Chairman Battista and Members Liebman and Schaumber participated.)

Charge filed by Catherine M. Fabozzi, an Individual; complaint alleged violation of Section 8(a)(1). Hearing at Buffalo, June 13 and 14, 2000. Adm. Law Judge David L. Evans issued his decision Sept. 13, 2000.



LawMemo publishes Employment Law Memo.
LawMemo.Com

Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.

Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. Copyright LawMemo, Inc.

  • Employment Law Memo emails designed for lawyers. 
  • Expert summaries of decisions from all federal and state appellate courts. 
  • Direct link to full text. 
  • Click here for free 4-week subscription