Internet Postings

Pugh’s posts on Instagram suggested that he was on the verge of committing some kind of violent act. The company’s decision to discharge him was reasonable in this situation. The union attempted to negotiate Pugh’s reinstatement pursuant to a last chance agreement, but these efforts were unsuccessful. It was rational ...

We accept the testimony of appellants’ witnesses that appointed representatives regularly campaigned in the plant and that management tolerated the activity. We do not regard the employer’s failure to respond more aggressively to complaints about this campaigning as evidence of the kind of active interference that would require an election ...

The IEB held that the local executive board should have rejected the charge based on our rule that Article 31 is not designed to resolve petty differences between union members. We do not believe the exchange between Cox and Leudecking fits this description. We affirm the notion that a local ...

The internet post described in Jackson’s charge is protected speech. Article 31 is not intended to address calling people names. The president was entitled to post his actual exchange with Jackson once the contents of that conversation were called into question. The contents of any conversation may be shared. There ...