Protected union activity

Protected union activity CSEA Local 861 and Wyoming County, 34 PERB 3042 Local 814 and Town of Poughkeepsie, 34 PERB 3043 Where the employer's reason for dismissing a probationary employee is rejected by PERB as pretextual because the employee was not disciplined for the misconduct claimed as the basis for the dismissal, the inference that the employer retaliated against the employee for pursuing a grievance in violation of Civil Service Law Sections 209-a.1(a) and 209-a.1(c) has not been rebutted by the employer. Similarly, in the Town of Poughkeepsie case, PERB held that the Town terminated an employee because of union organizing activities in violation of Civil Service Law Sections 209-a.1(a) and 209-a.1(c), finding that the reasons given by the Town justifying its action were pretextual because the employee had not been served with disciplinary charges for his alleged misconduct prior to his dismissal.

Read more detail on Recent Administrative Law Posts –

This entry was posted in Administrative law and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply