Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-15-01319/USCOURTS-caDC-15-01319-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
National Labor Relations Board
Respondent
Ozburn-Hessey Logistics, LLC
Petitioner
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC
Intervenor for Respondent

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No. 15-1319 September Term, 2016

FILED ON: DECEMBER 30, 2016

OZBURN-HESSEY LOGISTICS, LLC,

PETITIONER

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

RESPONDENT

UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL 

AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL-CIO-CLC,

INTERVENOR

Consolidated with 15-1369 

On Petition for Review and Cross-Application

for Enforcement of an Order of

the National Labor Relations Board

Before: KAVANAUGH and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge.

J U D G M E N T

This case was considered on the record from the National Labor Relations Board, and on 

the briefs and oral arguments of the parties. The Court has afforded the issues full consideration 

and has determined that they do not warrant a published opinion. See Fed. R. App. P. 36; D.C. 

Cir. R. 36(d). It is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the petition for review be DENIED and the Board’s 

cross-application for enforcement be GRANTED.

In 2011, the employees at Ozburn-Hessey Logistics’s warehouse facilities in Memphis, 

Tennessee voted to make United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, 

Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union their bargaining representative. A few 

months later, Ozburn-Hessey disciplined several of its employees for alleged misconduct. As 

relevant here, Ozburn-Hessey suspended Renal Dotson and discharged Deshonte Johnson. Both 

men had been involved in union activities. Ozburn-Hessey suspended Dotson because he 

allegedly displayed insubordinate behavior in two meetings and discharged Johnson because he

USCA Case #15-1319 Document #1653456 Filed: 12/30/2016 Page 1 of 2
allegedly jumped over a moving conveyor belt. These two employees claim, however, that they

were disciplined because of their union activities. 

Under the National Labor Relations Act, an employer may not discipline or discharge an 

employee based on the employee’s union activity. See 29 U.S.C. § 158(a). When an employer 

disciplines or discharges an employee and the employee alleges that the employment action 

occurred because of the employee’s union activity, the ultimate question is whether the employer’s 

stated reason for disciplining an employee was a pretext for discrimination based on the 

employee’s union activity. See Wright Line, 251 N.L.R.B. 1083, 1089 (1980); see also Chevron 

Mining, Inc. v. NLRB, 684 F.3d 1318, 1326-28 (D.C. Cir. 2012). In this case, the Board 

concluded that Ozburn-Hessey’s stated reasons for suspending Dotson and firing Johnson were 

pretextual. In particular, the Board found that Ozburn-Hessey disciplined Dotson and Johnson 

more severely than other employees who had engaged in similar conduct. With respect to 

Dotson, the Board noted that Ozburn-Hessey had not suspended other employees who were

disruptive in meetings or insolent to management. And with respect to Johnson, the Board noted 

that Ozburn-Hessey had not fired other employees who had jumped over the conveyor belt. 

Based on those and other facts, the Board concluded that Ozburn-Hessey suspended Dotson and

fired Johnson based on their union activities. 

Our standard of review of the Board’s decision is deferential. See Fort Dearborn Co. v. 

NLRB, 827 F.3d 1067, 1072 (D.C. Cir. 2016). Here, substantial evidence supports the Board’s 

finding that Ozburn-Hessey’s stated reasons for suspending Dotson and firing Johnson were 

pretexts for anti-union animus. Therefore, we deny Ozburn-Hessey’s petition for review and 

grant the Board’s cross-application for enforcement.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is 

directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after the resolution of any 

timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App. P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. R. 

41(a)(1).

Per Curiam

FOR THE COURT:

Mark J. Langer, Clerk

BY: /s/

Ken Meadows

Deputy Clerk

USCA Case #15-1319 Document #1653456 Filed: 12/30/2016 Page 2 of 2