Here's the full document, filed at the end of last month -- and a bit:
. . .Palmer testified that shortly after Wojhan confiscated literature from him in the breakroom, after Palmer had returned to his workstation, Operations Manager Ariana Ovadia asked to meet with him alone in a satellite breakroom. During this one-on-one meeting, Ovadia reiterated the message just given by Wojahn -- that Palmer could not distribute Union literature in the breakroom. In this regard, after telling Palmer that she was aware of the confiscation by Wojahn, Palmer told Ovadia that he went to the HR office to find out who had instructed Wojahn to take the literature.
Instead of responding directly to this comment, Ovadia told Palmer that she had “many lawyer friends” and that “they all said” that Respondent was allowed to remove Union literature. Ovadia followed this commentary with an unsolicited question to Palmer regarding why he “hated Amazon?” Palmer testified that by connecting the confiscation of his Union literature with Palmer allegedly “hating” Amazon, it made it seem as if Ovadia believed Palmer disliked his employer because he was distributing Union literature.
As discussed above, it is a violation of Section 8(a)(1) to prohibit employees from distributing union literature on non-work time in non-work areas. See e.g. Stoddard-Quirk Manufacturing Co., 138 NLRB 615 (1962); Republic Aviation Corp. v. NLRB, 324 U.S. 793 (1954). . . .
Amazon is going to lose here -- without a reasonable doubt. Out, now -- for a toasty, sunny mountain bike ride by the lake, and then some hand turned ice cream with cherries! Woot!
नमस्ते
No comments:
Post a Comment