## F I LED United States C ourt of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### M ay16,2007 Elisab eth A. Shumaker C l erk of C ourt PU BL I SH UNI TED S TATES CO URT O F AP PEALS

T E N T H C IR C U IT NAT I ONAL L AB OR RE L AT I ONS BO AR D, P eti ti o n er, v. N o. 06- 9513 UN I TED STATES POSTAL SERVI CE,

R e sp o n d e n t. APP LI CATI ON FOR ENFOR CEM ENT OF AN O RDER OF THE NAT I ONAL LA BOR R EL AT I ONS BOAR D (N O S . 2 8 -C A -19 1 4 8 (P ), 2 8 -C A -19 1 4 9 (P ), 2 8 -C A -19 3 2 7 (P )) S t a c y G a rr i c k Z i m m e r m a n , A t t o rn e y ( J i l l A . G r i ffi n , S u p e r v i s o ry A t t o rn e y; R onal d M ei s bur g, G ener al C ouns el ; J ohn E . H i ggi ns , J r . , D eputyG ener al Co u n s e l ; J o h n H. F e r g u s o n , As s o c i a t e Ge n e r a l Co u n s e l ; a n d Ai l e e n A. A r m s tr ong, D eputyA s s oci at e G ener al C ouns el , w i th heron the br i ef) , N at i onal L ab o r R elati o n s B o ard , W ash ing ton , D C , fo r P eti ti o n er. T er es a A . G ons al ves , C ouns el of R ecor d, U ni t ed St at es Post al Ser vi ce, W as hi ngt on, D C ( St ephan J . B oar dm an and H ow ar d J . K aufman, U ni t ed St at es Post al Ser vi ce, W as hi ngt on, D C ; St even E. C oneyand I s abel l e G . D or l an, of c o u n se l, D a llas , T e x a s, w ith h e r o n th e b rie fs), fo r R e sp o n d e n t. B efo re M UR P HY , HOLL OW AY , and TY M KOVI CH , C i rcui tJudg es. M UR P HY , C i r cui tJ udge.In i t s ent i rety , part1 o f t he B oard’s order s t at es: 1 T he N at i onal L aborR el at i ons B oar d or der s t hatt he R es pondent , U ni t ed St at es Post al Ser vi ce, A l buquer que, N ew M exi co, i t s offi cer s , agent s , s ucce s s or s , and a ss ig n s, sh a ll 1 . Ce a s e a n d d e s i s tf

r o m: (a ) T h re a ten in g e m p lo y e e s w ith u n sp e c ified re p risa ls beca us e theyengage d i n uni on orpr ot ect ed a c t i v i ty. ( b) D eny i ng an empl oy ee the r i ght s of uni on r epr es ent at i on dur i ng an i nves t i gat or yi nt ervi ew th a t th e e m p lo y e e re a so n a b lyb e liev e s m a yre su lt i n di s ci pl i naryact i on. ( c) R efus i ng t o perm i tan empl oy ee t o s peak w i th the empl oy ee’ s uni on r epr es ent at i ve pr i ort o an in v e stig a to ryin ter v iew th a t th e e m p lo y e e re a so n a b ly (c o n tin u e d ...) -2- I . I NT RO DU CT I ON Pet i t i onerN at i onal L aborR el at i ons B oar d ( “N L R B ” or“B oar d”) s eeks e nfor c e mentof

a n o r de ri s s ue d a ga i ns tthe U ni t e d St a t e s Pos t a l Se r vi c e ( “ U SPS” o r“ P o s t a l S e r v i c e ” ) fo rv i o l a t i o n s o f t h e Na t i o n a l L a b o rRe l a t i o n s Ac t( “ NL RA ” o r “ A c t” ) a t th re e fa c iliti e s w ith in A lb u q u e rq u e , N e w M e x ic o ’s m a in p o s t o ffic e . See Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N . L . R . B . N o. 26 ( A ug. 27, 2005) . A s par tof a r e me d yfo rv i o l a t i o n s o f NLRA s e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) , ( a ) ( 3 ) , a n d ( a ) ( 5 ) , 2 9 U. S . C. § 1 58 (a) (1) , (3) , (5) , the B oard ordered t he U S P S t o, am on g o ther things, cease and des i s tfr om “[i ] n anyot herm anneri nt er fer i ng w i th, r es tr ai ni ng, orcoer ci ng empl oy ees i n t he exe r ci s e of r i ght s guar ant eed them bySect i on 7 of the A ct . ” Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N . L . R . B . N o. 26, at2. T he B oar d al s o or der ed 1( . . . cont i nued) 1 bel i eves m ayr es ul ti n di s ci pl i naryact i on. ( d) Fai l i ng and r efus i ng t o i nform an empl oy ee a nd the empl oy ee’ s uni on r epr es ent at i ve of the s peci fi c cha r ges that are to b e d iscu ssed d u ri n g an inv esti g atory i nt ervi ew t hatthe empl oy ee r eas onabl ybel i eves m ay r es ul ti n di s ci pl i naryact i on. ( e) T hr eat eni ng empl oy ees thattheyw i l l be di s char ged for theirprot ect ed o r uni on act i vit i es. ( f) D i s ci pl i ni ng empl oy ees beca us e of thei rpr ot ect ed or un i on act i vit i es. ( g) D i s char gi ng empl oy ees beca us e of thei rpr ot ect ed or un i on act i vit i es. ( h) R efus i ng t o bar gai n col l ect i vel yw i th the A m er i can Post al W or ker s U ni on, L ocal N o. 380, A FL - C I O by fai l i ng and r efus i ng t o pr ovi de r eques t ed i nform at i on thati s r el evantand nec es s aryt o the U ni on as the c o llec tiv e b a rg a in in g re p re se n tativ e o f th o se U n it empl oy ees des cr i bed i n the exi s t i ng col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng agr eementand found a ppr opr i at e forthe purpos es of col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng w i thi n the meani ng of S e c tio n 9 (b ) o f

th e A c t. ( i ) I n anyot herm anneri nt er fer i ng w i th, r es tr ai ni ng, or c o e rc in g e m p lo y e e s in th e e x e rc ise o f th e rig h ts g u a ra n tee d th e m b yS e c tio n 7 o f th e A c t. Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N . L . R . B . N o. 26, at2. C l aus e ( i ) i s t he por t i on of th e o rd e r c h a lle n g e d in th is e n fo rc e m e n t a c tio n . -3- that l ang uag e t o thi s effectbe p ost ed at the thr ee facil i t i es w i thin the m ai n p ost o ffic e a s p a rt o f

a n o tic e to e m p lo y e e s a b o u t th e irri g h ts . Id. at3. T he Pos t al S erv ice c h all en g ed the b rea d th o f th e re m ed ial lang u ag e b efo re the B o ard and re n e w s its c h a llen g e b e fo re th is c o u rt. E xer ci s i ng j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 29 U . S . C . § 1 6 0 (e), w e e n fo rce the B o ard ’s ord er.T he V ehi cl e M ai nt enanc e Faci l i ty( “V M F”) i s r es pons i bl e forr epai r i ng 2 a n d m a in ta in in g a ll P o s ta l S e rv ic e v e h ic le s in th e A lb u q u e rq u e d is tr ic t. A l buquer que mai l i s pr oces s ed att he A uxi l i arySer vi ce Fac i l i ty( “A SF”) and the m a in p lan t. A po st al w orker union craftdir ect or fi l es and p rocess es gri evan ces, 3 s ubm i t s i nform at i on r eques t s t o the Pos t al Ser vi ce, and per form s otheruni on s t ew ar d dut i es as s oci at ed w i th t he mai nt enanc e of a col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng a g re e m e n t. -4- I I . BA CKGROUND T h e th re e fa c ili ties w ith in A lb u q u e rq u e ’s m a in p o st o ffice a re th e V e h icle M ai nt enanc e Faci l i ty( “V M F”) , the A uxi l i arySer vi ce Fac i l i ty( “A SF”) , and the m a in p lan t. I ti s undi s put ed thatN L R A vi ol at i ons i nvol vi ng tw o uni on cr aft

2 di r ect or s and al l V M F em pl oy ees occurr ed att he thr ee faci l i t i es i n 2003 .

3 B egi nni ng i n Sept ember2003, w hen V M F cr aftdi r ect orJ ohn O r l ovs kym ade a n in fo rm a tio n re q u e st fo r fo rm s h e b e liev e d u n io n w o rk e rs w e re u n law f u llya sk e d to sig n , V M F M a n a g e r M ich a e l Q u in tan a a n d V M F S u p e rv iso r T h o m a s S m ith s ubj ect ed O r l ovs kyt o ni ne r et al i at or ydi s ci pl i naryact i ons , i ncl udi ng offi ci al di s cus s i ons , fac t - fi ndi ng m eet i ngs , a l et t erof w arni ng, s us pens i ons , and, ul t i m at el y , di s char ge. Sm i th and Q ui nt ana a l s o pr event ed O r l ovs kyfr om confe rr i ng w i th a uni on r epr es ent at i ve dur i ng tw o fac t - fi ndi ng m eet i ngs and fa i l ed t o di s cl os e the cha r ges agai ns thi m pr i ort o one of the meet i ngs , both i n vi ol at i on of the uni on’ s col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng agr eement . A ft erO r l ovs ky ’ s di s char ge, Sm i th hel d a mandat orym eet i ng w i th al l V M F em pl oy ees atw hi ch he a s s er t ed thatempl oy ees agr eed t o r es tr i ctt hei rbehavi orw hen theycame t o w or k fort he-5-

Post al Ser vi ce, chas t i s ed uni on m ember s foral l ow i ng O r l ovs kyt o “s quander uni on dues ” w i th hi s conduct , and thr eat ened a l l empl oy ees w i th di s ci pl i ne or di s char ge forengagi ng i n t he types of “s el f- des truct i ve beha vi or ” i n w hi ch O r l ovs kyengage d. Fi nal l y , al s o i n 2003, t he A SF’s cr aftdi r ect or , C har l es T ruj i l l o, m ade s ever al i nform at i on r eques t s of U SPS m anage m entr egar di ng m a n a g e m e n t’s a c tio n s a t th e A S F a n d th e m a in p lan t. T ruji ll o ’s req u ests w ere m ade fort he purpos es of i nves t i gat i ng pot ent i al gr i evanc es and pr oces s i ng fi l ed gri evan ces. P ost al S ervi ce m anag em ent fai l ed to r espon d to tw o o f t hese request s. A n admi ni s tr at i ve l aw j udge ( “A L J ”) hear d t es t i m onyand r ece i ved e v id e n c e in Ju n e 2 0 0 4 fin d in g v io latio n s o f N L R A se c tio n 8 (a )(1 ) a n d (a )(3 ) in c o n n e c t i o n w i th S m i th ’ s a n d Q u i n t a n a ’ s a c t i o n s t o w a r d O r l o v s k y, a vi ol at i on of s e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) i n c o n n e c t i o n wi th S mi th ’ s t h r e a t s t o a l l VM F e mp l o y e e s , a n d t wo vi ol at i ons of s ect i on 8( a) ( 5) i n connec t i on w i th T ruj i l l o’ s unful fi l l ed A SF and m ai n pl anti nform at i on r eques t s . W hen cons i der i ng an appr opr i at e r emedyfort he m u lt iple v iolati o n s, the A L J too k into a cc o u n t bo th the P o stal S erv ice’s nati on w i de h i st oryof secti on 8(a) (5) i nfo rm at i on -r equ estviol at i on s, as w el l as a J anuary2003 cons entj udgm entent er ed byt hi s courtbetw een the B oar d and the U S P S i nv olvi ng i nfo rm at i on -r equ estviol at i on s att hree ot her A l bu qu erque p ost o ffic e s . T he A L J ul t i m at el yr ecomm ended a br oad ce as e- and- des i s tor der co n tai n ing the re m ed ial “in a n yo ther m an n er” lang u ag e n o w ch all en g ed b efo re-6-

th is c o u rt . Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 34 5 N . L . R . B . N o. 26 , at23 . T he A L J al so re c o m m e n d e d n o tic e p o s tin g a t a ll U S P S fa c iliti e s in th e c ity o f A lb u q u e rq u e . Id. at21. T he U SPS cont es t ed both the geogr aphi c s cope of the pos t i ng r equi r ement and the br eadth of the l anguage i n the A L J ’ s r ecomm ended or der . A s t o the br eadth of the ce as e- and- des i s tl anguage , i tar gued a br oad or derw as i nappr opr i at e underN L R B pr ece denti n Hi ckm ot tFoods , Inc. , 242 N . L . R . B . 1357 ( 1979) , beca us e i t s vi ol at i ons w er e l i m i t ed t o one l ocat i on and w er e comm i t t ed by a s m al l num berof l ow - l evel s upervi s or s ; i tcont ended i t s m i s conductdi d not a m o u n t to e g re g io u s o r w id e sp re a d v io latio n s a n d d id n o t d e m o n stra te a p ro c liv ity t o vi ol at e the A ct , as r equi r ed forthe i s s uance of a br oad r emedi al or derunder Hi ckm ot tFoods . T he U SPS , fur therm or e, obj ect ed t o the A L J ’ s cons i der at i on of n a tio n w id e N L R A v io latio n s w h e n d e ter m in in g th a t th e U S P S h a d a p ro c liv ityto v io late th e A c t. Itc laim e d th e n u m b e r o f n a tio n w id e v io latio n s p a led in compar i s on t o i t s l ong hi s t oryof uni on cooper at i on. A three -m em b er N L R B p an el m o d ifi ed the s co p e o f th e A L J’s re c o m m e n d a tio n to re q u ire p o stin g o n lya t th e th re e fa c ili ties w ith in A l buquer que’ s m ai n pos toffi ce r athert han i n al l A l buquer que ci typos t al fa c iliti e s , b u t a ffir m e d th e b ro a d inju n c tiv e la n g u a g e re c o m m e n d e d b yth e A L J . Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N . L . R . B . N o. 26, at1. W i th one mem ber di s s ent i ng as t o t he nee d forbr oad ce as e- and- des i s tl anguage , t he pane l-7-

det erm i ned the vi ol at i ons atA l buquer que’ s m ai n pos toffi ce “ demonstr at ed a pr ocl i vi tyt o r es pond unl aw ful l yt o the [U SPS ] empl oy ees ’ m eani ngful exer ci s e of thei rs t atut oryr i ght s . ” Id . at2. T he B oar d s t at ed i t s det erm i nat i on thata br oad cea s e- and- des i s tor derw as appr opr i at e bas ed on the s er i es of s ect i on 8( a) ( 1) and ( a) ( 3) vi ol at i ons byQ ui nt ana a nd Sm i th agai ns tO r l ovs ky , and the s ect i on 8( a) ( 1) vi ol at i on r es ul t i ng fr om the meet i ng Sm i th hel d w i th al l V M F em pl oy ees aft er O rl o v s k y ’s d is c h a rg e . Id . at1–2. T he l at t eri nci dentw as part i cul ar l ys i gni fi cant in th e B o a rd ’s d e te rm in a tio n th a t th e U S P S h a d a p ro c liv ity to v io la te th e A c t. Id. a t 2 . A d d it ion all y , as h ad the A L J, the B o ard refere n ce d the T en th C ir cu it ’s e ntryof a J a nu a r y20 03 c on s e ntj ud gmen tbe tw e e n the N LR B and the U SPS, w hi ch had be en pr eci pi t at ed byi nform at i on- r eques tvi ol at i ons atthr ee other U SPS fac i l i t i es i n A l buquer que and w hi ch cont ai ned the s ame br oad r emedi al la n g u a g e c h a lle n g e d h e re . Id . at1 ( ci t i ng N LR B v. Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , N o. 0 2 -95 8 7 (10 th C ir . Jan . 8 , 2 0 0 3 ) (un p u b li sh ed co n sen t jud g m en t) ). T h e B o ard obs erved thatthe N L R A vi ol at i ons ar i s i ng i n the w ake of O r l ovs ky ’ s i nform at i on re q u e st a m o u n ted to th e “ v e ryc o n d u c t w h ich th e p re v io u s o rd e r so u g h t to r emedy . ” Id. A l tho ug h the B oard’s order i n the i nst ant A l bu qu erque case al so refer enced a decis i on i ssued t he sam e dayi nv olvi ng i nfo rm at i on -r equ est v io la tio n s a t W a c o , T e x a s , p o s ta l fa c iliti e s , Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N . L . R . B . N o . 2 5 (20 0 6 ), the B o ard d id n o t exp li cit lyd iscu ss the P o stal S erv ice’s-8-

h ist o ryo f n ati o n w ide v iolati o n s in justi fy ing it s b roa d ce ase -an d -de sisto rde r. United S tates P ostal Serv . , 345 N . L . R . B . N o. 26, at1.

I I I . DI S CU S S I ON T h is c o u rt h a s th e a u th o ri ty to e n fo rc e , m o d if y , o r s e t a s id e a n N L R B o rd e r. 2 9 U .S .C .§ 1 6 0 (e ). E n fo rc e m e n t is a p p ro p ria te w h e n “ th e a g e n c yh a s c o rre c tly appl i ed the l aw and i t s fi ndi ngs ar e s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence i n the r ecor d as a w hol e. ” N L R B v. Vel ocit

y Express , 4 3 4 F . 3 d 1 1 9 8 , 1 2 0 1 (10 th C ir . 2006) ( quot at i on om i t t ed) . “Subs t ant i al evi dence i s defi ned as s uch r el evant evi dence as a r eas onabl e mi nd m i ghtacc eptas adequa t e t o s uppor ta conc l us i on. ” Id . (qu o tat ion o m itted). W h e n r e v i e wi n g a Bo a r d - o r d e r e d r e me d yfo rNLRA v io latio n s, a p p e llate c o u rts m u st re c o g n ize th e B o a rd ’s “ p rim a ryre sp o n sib ili ty a n d b ro a d d is c re tio n to d e v is e re m e d ie s th a t e ffe c tu a te th e p o lic ie s o f th e A c t.” Su r e - Ta n , In c . v . NLRB , 4 6 7 U .S . 8 8 3 , 8 9 8 (1 9 8 4 ) ( c itin g 2 9 U .S .C .§ 1 6 0 (c )) . T h is c o u rt ’s s c o p e o f

re v ie w is n a rr o w , i d. , an d sh o u ld g iv e “ sp e c ial re sp e c t” to th e B o a rd ’s c h o ic e o f re m e d y , Vel ocit

y Express , 4 3 4 F .3 d a t 1 2 0 2 . W e sh o u ld not , ther efor e, di s turb t he B oar d’ s chos en r emedyunl es s i tcan be s how n that“the o rd e r is a p a ten t atte m p t to a c h iev e e n d s o th e r th a n th o se w h ich c a n fa irlyb e sa id t o effectuat e the pol i ci es of the [N L R A ] . ” Id. B e c a u se th e U S P S d o e s n o t ch a llen g e th e B o a rd ’s fa c tu a l fin d in g s o r its concl us i ons r egar di ng the occ urr ence of s ect i on 8( a) ( 1) , ( a) ( 3) , and ( a) ( 5)-9-

vi ol at i ons , t he onl yi s s ue forthi s cour t ’ s det erm i nat i on i s the perm i s s i bi l i tyof the br oad, “i n anyotherm anner ” l anguage the B oar d thoughtappr opr i at e t o i ncl ude i n i t s r emedi al or der . T he br eadth of a r emedi al or der“mustdepend upon the ci r cumst ance s of ea ch ca s e. ” N L R B v. Exp ress P u b l’g C o. , 312 U . S. 426, 436 ( 1941) . T o be a pe r m i s s i bl e exe r ci s e of the B oar d’ s di s cr et i on, an or derthat enjoins v iolati o n s o ther tha n tho se fo u n d b ythe B o ard is pe rm issi b le i f itap p ea rs the enj oi ned vi ol at i ons “bea rs om e r es embl ance t o thatw hi ch the empl oy erhas comm i t t ed orthatdangerof thei rcomm i s s i on i n the futur e i s t o be ant i ci pat ed fr om the cour s e of [ i t s ] conducti n the pas t . ” Id. at437. A keyi nqui ryi s w hether the empl oy er ’ s act i ons di s pl ay“an a t t i tude of oppos i t i on t o the purpos es of the A ctt o pr ot ectthe r i ght s of empl oy ees gener al l y . ” May Dep t . S t o r e s Co. v . NLRB , 3 2 6 U .S . 3 7 6 , 3 9 2 (1 9 4 5 ). R ecogni zi ng t hata br oad r emedi al or deri s an extr aor di naryr emedy , the B o a rd itse lf

h a s s a id th e “ in a n yo th e r m a n n e r” lan g u a g e a t issu e h e re is “w arr ant ed onl yw hen a r es pondenti s s how n t o have a pr ocl i vi tyt o vi ol at e the A c t o r h a s e n g a g e d in su c h e g re g io u s o r w id e sp re a d m isc o n d u c t as to d e m o n stra te a gene r al di s r egar d forthe empl oy ees ’ fundament al s t atut or yr i ght s . ” Hickm o tt Foods , 242 N . L . R . B . at1357. R equi s i t e di s r egar d forempl oy ees ’ r i ght s m aybe demonstr at ed w her e, forexampl e, s ect i on 8( a) ( 1) vi ol at i ons have oc curr ed pr i or to o r c o n c u rr e n tly w ith a d is c ri m in a to ry d is c h a rg e , id . , or w here an em ploy ers ’T he F l or i da St eeldeci s i on, 223 N . L . R . B . 174, 175 ( 1976) , pr edat es t he 4 B oar d’ s pr onouncementi n Hi ckm ot tFoods th a t b ro a d re m e d ial o rd e rs w o u ld , in th e f u tu re , b e re s e rv e d fo r a n a rr o w s e t o f c a s e s . See Hi ckm ottFoo ds, Inc. , 242 N .L .R .B . 1 3 5 7 , 1 3 5 7 (1 9 7 9 ). F lo rida S tee l i s ci t ed i n Hi ckm ot tFoods , h o w ev er, as a ca s e w hos e fa ct s w oul d j us t i fya br oad r emedi al or dereven unde rt he Hi ckm ot tFoods te s t. Id. a t 1 3 5 7 & n .4 . F l or i da St eeli nvol ved thr eat s bys ever al s upervi s or s agai ns ts t eel w or ker s forcol l ect i ve bar gai ni ng and otheruni on a c tiv ity , in v io latio n o f se c tio n 8 (a )(1 ), an d a d isc rim in a to ryd isc h a rg e , in v io la tio n o f

s e c tio n 8 (a )( 3 ). F l ori da SteelC orp . , 223 N . L . R . B . at174. T he N L R B d eterm ined b roa d rem ed ial lang u ag e w as n ec essa ryb ec au se F lori d a S teel’s conductw ent“t o t he hea r tof the A ct . ” Id . a t 1 7 5 . -10- conduct“goes t o the hea r tof the A ct , ” F l ori da SteelC orp . , 223 N . L . R . B . 174, 17 5 (1976 ), by bu rdeni ng or i nter feri ng w i th w orkers ’ sect i on 7 ri gh t s. 4 A fter rev iew ing the re co rd, an d g iving ap p rop ri ate d efere n ce to the N L R B ’s e x p e rt is e in s e le c tin g a re m e d y , Vel ocit y Express , 4 3 4 F . 3 d at 12 0 2 , this co u rt concl udes ther e w as s uffi ci entevi dence fr om w hi ch the B oar d coul d have det erm i ned the vi ol at i ons i n A l buquer que’ s t hr ee mai n pos toffi ce faci l i t i es demonstr at ed oppos i t i on t o t he purpos es of the A ctand j us t i fi ed a br oad r emedi al o rd e r. See May D ept . St or es C o. , 326 U . S. at392. T he B oar d det erm i ned, and the U SPS does notcont es t , thatO r l ovs ky ’ s r eques tfori nform at i on t ouched off an esc alati n g series o f N L R A v iolati o n s d em o n str ati n g an im u s tow ard s O rl o v sk y ’s se c tio n 7 rig h ts. In p a rticu lar , O rlo v sk yw a s n o t o n lyu n a b le to o b tain i nform at i on on behal f of the uni on, butal s o r ece i ved a w arni ng, s us pens i ons and, ult i m at el y , a dis charge, i n ret al i at i on for assert i ng basi c un i on ri gh t s. H e w as, m or eover , tw i ce de ni ed the oppor tuni tyt o s peak w i th a uni on r epr es ent at i ve and,-11-

on one occ as i on, deni ed the cha nce t o hearthe cha r ges agai ns thi m i n connec t i on w ith fa c t- fin d in g m e e tin g s . M a n a g e me n t ’ s a c t i o n s , mo r e o v e r , we r e n o tl i mi t e d t o Or l o v s k ya l o n e . At the meet i ng t hatSuper vi s orSm i th hel d w i th al l V M F em pl oy ees a w eek a ft er O r l ovs ky ’ s t erm i nat i on, Sm i th t hr eat ened the empl oy ees w i th di s ci pl i ne or d isch arg e if the ych o se to en g ag e in th e sa m e b eh av ior as O rl o v sk y . T h e B o ard in terp re ted S m ith ’s r e m a rk s a s a n “ u n law f u l[ ] w a rn [ in g ] . . . th a t a s im ilar fa te aw ai t ed thos e w ho encour aged z eal ous uni on act i on. ” Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 3 4 5 N .L .R .B . N o . 2 6 , at 2 . D u rin g h is le c tu re , S m ith c o m p a re d th e w o rk p lac e to a l i feboa tand t ol d empl oy ees thatpeopl e i n a l i feboa ts i tuat i on have “ l i m i t ed al t ernat i ves of appr opr i at e beha vi oravai l abl e t o them. ” Sm i th i ndi cat ed that O r l ovs ky ’ s err orw as tr y i ng t o “det erm i ne the di r ect i on of the V M F” thr ough compl ai ni ng, w hi ni ng, and thr eat eni ng m anage m entw i th demands. H e then s um m ar i zed e ach of

O r l ovs ky ’ s gr i evanc es , i ndi cat ed theyw er e i l l egi t i m at e us es o f u n ion reso u rce s, an d su g g ested an yu n ion m em b er w h o tolerated O rl o v sk y ’s conductbor e r es pons i bi l i tyforand s houl d be angryatO r l ovs ky . Sm i th l abel ed O r l ovs ky ’ s ques t i ons dur i ng s t and- up m eet i ngs as “i nt errupt i ons ” and “di s rupt i ons , ” and a dvi s ed O r l ovs ky ’ s “fol l ow er s ” t o obeys upervi s or s ’ di r ect i ons w ith o u t c o m p la in ts o r q u e s tio n s . A ccordi ng t o tw o em ploy ees w ho w ere pr esentatt he m eet i ng , S m i th als o h e ld u p tw o file fo ld e rs, a fa t o n e w h ich h e sa id re p re se n ted a ll o f th e w o rk S m ith-12-

a n d m a n a g e m e n t h a d d o n e to im p ro v e th e liv e s o f V M F e m p lo y e e s, a n d a th in one, cont ai ni ng O r l ovs ky ’ s gr i evanc es , w hi ch Sm i th s ai d r epr es ent ed the w or k t he u n io n h a d d o n e to im p ro v e e m p lo y e e s ’ l iv e s . Sm i th’ s m es s age, acc or di ng t o the empl oy ees , w as thatthe gr i evanc es O r l ovs kyfi l ed w er e fr i vol ous . T he empl oy ees al s o t es t i fi ed theyunder s t ood Sm i th’ s l ectur e t o be a w arni ng that“r ocki ng the boat , ” orengagi ng i n uni on act i vi t i es , coul d l ead t o t erm i nat i on. T h e n a tu re o f

S m ith ’s th re a ts to th e V M F e m p lo y e e s a re p a rticu lar ly cons equent i al t o t hi s court ’ s det erm i nat i on thatm ember s of U SPS m anage m ent di s pl ay ed “a n att i tude of oppos i t i on t o the purpos es of the A ct . ” May D e p t. S to r e s C o ., 3 2 6 U .S . at 3 9 2 . T h e b re a d th o f S m ith ’s th re a ts im p lica ted m u c h , if n o t all, se c tio n 7 a c tiv ity : D u rin g S m ith ’s s p e e c h , w o rk e rs w e re n o t o n ly c a u tio n e d a g a in st s e e k in g in fo rm a tio n f ro m m a n a g e m e n t, bu t w e re a lso to ld n o t to sp e a k o u t in m e e tin g s w ith m a n a g e m e n t an d n o t to q u e stio n su p e rv iso rs. S m ith es s ent i al l yi ndi cat ed t o w or ker s that , i f as s er t i ng uni on r i ght s r equi r ed ac t i ng o u tsid e th e ra n g e o f

m a n a g e m e n t-sa n c tio n e d b e h a v io r, em p lo y e e s s h o u ld re m a in sile n t o r fa c e c o n se q u e n c e s s im ilar to O rlo v sk y ’s. S m ith ’s s p e e c h a lso e ffe c tiv e ly en co u rag ed u n ion m em b ers to re ign in u n ion stew ard s, cra ft d ir ec tors, an d o thers w h o m a k e leg iti m a te d e m a n d s o n m a n a g e m e n t. B yd isp layi n g su c h o p p o sitio n to uni on or gani zat i on and uni on r i ght s , Sm i th cr eat ed a r i s k thatPost al Ser vi ce e m p lo y e e s w o u ld n o t fe e l f re e to e njo yth e rig h t o f se lf-o rg a n iza tio n , en g a g e in p ro tec ted u n io n a c tiv ity , o r b e n e fit fro m th e g u a ra n tee s p ro v id e d to th e m in th e ir-13-

col l ect i ve bar gai ni ng agr eementand N L R A s ect i on 7. Sm i th’ s act i ons , ther efor e, w entt o the “he artof the A ct , ” F l or i da St eelC or p. , 223 N . L . R . B . at175, and, al ong w i th t he mul t i pl e vi ol at i ons of O r l ovs ky ’ s r i ght s bySm i th and Q ui nt ana, ju s tif yth e B o a rd ’s d e c is io n to c ra f t a b ro a d ly-w o rd e d re m e d ia l o rd e r. M o re o v e r, as th e B o a rd n o ted , the v io latio n s a t th e th re e fa c ili ties w ith in A l bu qu e r qu e ’ s mai n p os toffi c e oc c urr e d l e s s tha n a y e a ra ft e rthe U SPS vol unt ar i l yagr eed, i n connec t i on w i th i nform at i on- r eques tvi ol at i ons atthr ee otherA l buquer que pos t al fac i l i t i es , t o a br oad ce as e- and- des i s tor derthat c o n ta in e d th e v e ry la n g u a g e in d is p u te h e re . Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N .L .R .B . N o . 2 6 , a t 1 . A l though t he pr i orA l buquer que or derappl i ed t o fac i l i t i es otherthan thos e ati s s ue i n t hi s appea l , i tw as r eas onabl e fort he N L R B t o vi ew the r ecurr ence of ant i - uni on act i vi tyw i thi n the s ame geogr aphi c ar ea a s fur ther e v id e n c e o f

th e P o sta l S e rv ice ’s p ro c liv ityto v io late th e A c t. T he Pos t al Ser vi ce a r gues t hi s court ’ s det erm i nat i on s houl d be gui ded by the Fi fth C i r cui t ’ s r ece ntm odi fi cat i on of a br oad ce as e- and- des i s tor deratW aco, T exas , pos t al fac i l i t i es . See N L R B v. United S tates P ostal Serv . , 477 F. 3d 263, 2 7 1 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ), m odi f yi ng or deri n Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 3 4 5 N. L. R. B. N o . 2 5 (2 0 0 5 ). T h is c o u rt, h o w e v e r, co n c lu d e s th e W a c o c a se is e a sily di s t i ngui s habl e. T he onl yN L R A vi ol at i ons i n W aco i nvol ved fourunful fi l l ed i nform at i on r eques t s w hi ch occ ur r ed af t eran ea r l i ers er i es of tw el ve unful fi l l ed in fo rm a tio n re q u e s ts . Id. at265. I n contr as t , t he Pos t al Ser vi ce’ s act i ons at-14-

A l buquer que’ s m ai n pos toffi ce faci l i t i es began w i th i nform at i on r eques t s , but , as t o O r l ovs kyand the V M F em pl oy ees , di d notend ther e. T he W aco c as e i n no w ayi nvol ved the mul t i pl e i ns t ance s of r et al i at ory , pr ogr es s i ve di s ci pl i ne or thr eat s t o al l empl oy ees thatoccurr ed i n A l buquer que. Fur therm or e, ther e w as noty eta ce as e- and- des i s tor deri n pl ace i n W aco t o addr es s the tw el ve pr i or v io la tio n s w h e n th e s u b s e q u e n t fo u r v io la tio n s o c c u rr e d . Id. a t 2 7 0 . A ccor di ngl y , w hi l e the Fi fth C i r cui t ’ s m odi fi cat i on of the W aco or derm ayhave b e e n a p p ro p ri a te , th e s a m e m o d ific a tio n is n o t r e q u ir e d h e re . In c o n c lu d in g th e b re a d th o f th e B o a rd ’s r e m e d ial o rd e r is a p p ro p ria te, th is courtr ej ect s the Pos t al Ser vi ce’ s att empt s t o ar gue i t s s i ze, dece ntr al i zed s tructur e, s m al l num berof nat i onw i de vi ol at i ons , and l ong hi s t oryof good l abor relati o n s n eg ate the B o ard ’s pro cli v ityd eterm ination . A lth o u g h the A L J’s re c o m m e n d a tio n a c c o rd e d s o m e w e ig h t to U S P S v io la tio n s n a tio n w id e , s ee Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 3 4 5 N .L .R .B . N o . 2 6 , at 2 0 -2 1 , the B o a rd re lied so lely on the vi ol at i ons t hatoccurr ed i n A l buquer que i n cr aft i ng i t s or der . A nd, a l th o u g h t h e Bo a r d d i d r e fe rb yi n c o rp o r a t i o n t o th e r e me d yo r d e r e d i n i t s n o woverrul ed W aco de ci s i on , i d. a t 1 , it s p ro c liv ityd e ter m in a tio n w a s b a se d o n its undi s put ed fi ndi ng r egar di ng ant i - uni on ani m us and r et al i at i on t ow ar ds O r l ovs ky and threat s t o all V M F em ploy ees. Id. a t 2 . (“[ A ]f ter th e R e sp o n d e n t u n law f u lly d isc ip lin e d a n d d isc h a rg e d th e ste w a rd [ O rlo v sk y ], th e R e sp o n d e n t u n law f u lly w arned the as s embl ed empl oy ees thata s i m i l arfat e aw ai t ed thos e w ho-15-

encour aged z eal ous uni on act i on. B ythes e ac t i ons , the R es pondentdemonstr at ed a p ro c liv ityto re sp o n d u n law f u llyto th e e m p lo y e e s’ m e a n in g f u l ex e rc ise o f

th e ir sta tu to ryrig h ts.” ). F u rth e rm o re , the P o sta l S e rv ice p ro v id e d n o e v id e n c e to s ubs t ant i at e i t s cl ai m s abouti t s pos i t i ve, l ong- t erm r el at i ons hi p w i th the pos t al w or ker s ’ uni on, t her ebypr event i ng both the B oar d and thi s cour tfr om c o n s id e ri n g th e m e ri ts o f s u c h a n a rg u m e n t.

I V. CO NC L US I ON T h e N L R B ’s d e ter m in a tio n th a t th e P o sta l S e rv ice h a s a p ro c liv ityto demonstr at e oppos i t i on t o w or ker s ’ s ect i on 7 r i ght s i s s uppor t ed bys ubs t ant i al evi dence . T he ce as e- and- des i s tor der ’ s i ncl us i on of l anguage enj oi ni ng m a n a g e m e n t a t A lb u q u e rq u e ’s m a in p o s t o ffic e f ro m in te rfe ri n g “ in a n y. . . m anner ” w i th w or ker s ’ s ect i on 7 r i ght s i s , t her efor e, a r emedy“thateffectuat es the pol i ci es of the A ct . ” Sur e- Tan, Inc. , 467 U . S. at398. A ccor di ngl y , t he B oar d’ s or derw i l l be ENFORCED and pos t i ng w i l l be r equi r ed att he thr ee fa c iliti e s w ith in A lb u q u e rq u e ’s m a in p o s t o ffic e .06- 9513, Nat i onalLabor Rel at i ons B oar d v. U. S. P os talSer vi ce .

TY M KOVI CH , C i r cui tJ udge, concurr i ng. I concur , butw r i t e t o add a few comm ent s aboutt he s cope of t he r emedy i mp o s e d b yth e NLRB. T he N L R B ’ s pow ert o s el ecta r emedyi s br oad, s ubj ectt o l i m i t ed j udi ci al re v ie w . D ayton Ti r e & R ubberC o. v . NLRB , 591 F. 2d 566 , 5 7 0 (1 0 th C ir . 1 9 7 9 ). “[W ] e r evi ew onl yt o ens ur e the N L R B act ed w i thi n r eas onabl e bounds and s ubs t ant i al evi dence s uppor t s the or der . ” N LR B v. Vel oci t

y Expre s s , Inc. , 434 F . 3 d 1 1 9 8 , 1 2 0 1 (10 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ). W e s h o u l d n o td i s tu rb a n o r d e ro f t h e NLRB u n les s it a ttem p ts “ to a c h iev e e n d s o th e r th a n th o se . . . fa irly. . . sa id to effectuat e the pol i ci es of the [N at i onal L aborR el at i ons ] A ct. . . i ncl ud[i ng] t he pr om ot i on of i ndus tr i al peac e, the pr event i on of unfa i rl aborpr act i ces and pr ot ect i on [of] vi ct i m i zed e m pl oy ees . ” D ay to n Tir e & R u b b e r, 5 9 1 F .2 d a t 5 7 0 . I n effectuat i ng the pol i ci es of the A ct , t he N L R B ’ s “pr opos ed r emedy[m us t ] be t ai l or ed t o the unfa i rl aborpr act i ce i ti s i nt ended t o r edr es s . ” Sur e- Tan, Inc. v. NLRB , 4 6 7 U .S . 8 8 3 , 9 0 0 (1 9 8 4 ). A fa ilu re to re a so n a b lytailo r th e re m e d yis a rb itr a ry a n d c a p ri c io u s . See Vel ocit y Express , 43 4 F . 3d at12 06 (M urphy , J. c o n c u rr in g a n d d is s e n tin g ). W e h a v e h e ld th a t inju n c tiv e re lief is a p o w e rf

u l re m e d yto “ b e n a rro w ly t ai l or ed t o r emedythe harm s how n. ” G a rr iso n v . B a ke r Hu g h e s O ilf ield O per at i ons , Inc. , 2 8 7 F .3 d 9 5 5 , 9 6 2 (1 0 th C ir. 2 0 0 2 ). M o re sp e c ifica lly , in th is ci r cui tw e al l ow a br oad or derenj oi ni ng al l vi ol at i ons of the N at i onal L aborA fin d in g o f p e rsis ten t atte m p ts b yv a ry in g m e a n s to in ter fe re w ith 1 empl oy ee r i ght s j us t i fi es a br oad i nj unct i on bydemonstr at i ng “an a t t i tude of oppos i t i on t o t he purpos es of the A ct . ” N LR B v. A r m our& Co. , 154 F. 2d 570, 5 7 8 (1 0 th C ir . 1 9 4 6 ). S e e a ls o May Dep ’ tS t o r e s Co. v . NLRB , 326 U . S. 376, 392 ( 1945) ( r equi r i ng “a c l eardet erm i nat i on byt he B oar d of an a t t i tude of oppos i t i on t o the purpos es of the A ctt o pr ot ectt he r i ght s of empl oy ees gener al l y ”) . Such a d e te rm in a tio n m u s t b e s u p p o rt e d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . See Vel ocit y Express , 4 3 4 F .3 d a t 1 2 0 1 . T he rul e has been fol l ow ed i n thi s ci r cui t . I n N LR B v. Seampr uf

e, Inc. , 2 3 8 2 F .2 d 8 2 0 , 8 2 2 (1 0 th C ir. 1 9 6 7 ), w e m o d ified a b ro a d o rd e r so th a t itw o u ld coveronl ythe “unfai rl aborpr act i ces found t o have be en comm i t t ed and other r el at ed unl aw ful act s . ” -2- R el at i ons A ctonl yw her e the defendanthas engage d i n “per s i s t entatt empt s by v a ryin g m e th o d s to in te rfe re w ith e m p lo y e e ri g h ts .” N L R B v. P rocess & 1 P ol l ut i on C ontr olC o. , 588 F. 2d 786, 792 ( 10th C i r . 1978) ( ci t i ng N LR B v. Exp ress P u b l’g , 3 1 2 U .S . 4 2 6 , 4 3 7

– 3 8 (1 9 4 1 )) . T he Supr eme C our thas expl ai ned thatC ongr es s di d noti nt end fe der al court s t o enfor ce N L R B or der s thatfede r al court s coul d nototherw i s e i s s ue th e m s e lv e s . Exp ress P u b l’g , 312 U . S. at435. “A fede r al courthas br oad pow er t o r es tr ai n act s w hi ch ar e of the s ame t ype orcl as s as unl aw ful act s w hi ch the courthas found t o have be en comm i t t ed . . . . [B utt he Supr eme C ] our tw i l l s t r i ke fr om an i nj unct i on decr ee r es tr ai nt s upon the comm i s s i on of unl aw ful act s w hi ch ar e thus di s s oci at ed fr om thos e w hi ch a de fenda nthas comm i t t ed. ” Id. at 435–36. I nj unct i ons thatbr oadl yor dert he enj oi ned partys i m pl yt o obeyt he l aw

2 a n d n o t v io la te th e s ta tu te a re g e n e ra lly im p e rm is s ib le . Int ’ lR ect i f i erC or p. v. I XY S C or p. , 3 8 3 F . 3 d 1 3 1 2 , 1 3 1 6 (F ed . C ir . 2 0 0 4 ); D avis v. R i chm ond,-3-

Fr e dr i c ks b u rg& Po t o mac R. R. , 8 0 3 F .2 d 1 3 2 2 , 1 3 2 8 (4 th C ir. 1 9 8 6 ); EE O Cv. Wo o ster B ru sh C o . E mp loye es R eli ef A ss’n , 727 F. 2d 566, 5 7 6

– 7 7 (6th C ir . 1 9 8 4 ); se e a lso P u b lic In ter e st R e se a rc h G ro u p o f Ne w Je rs ey , In c . v. P o w e ll D uf f r yn Ter m i nals , Inc. , 9 1 3 F .2 d 6 4 , 8 3 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 0 ); G addy v. A bex Corp. , 8 8 4 F . 2 d 3 1 2 , 3 1 8 (7th C ir . 1 9 8 9 ); C alvi n K l ei n C osm et i cs v. P arf um s de C oeu r, Ltd. , 8 2 4 F .2 d 6 6 5 , 6 6 9 (8 th C ir . 1 9 8 7 ). T h e N L R B a d m its th e c e a se -a n d -d e sis t o rd e r iss u e d h e re is s o b ro a d th a t it “w il l subject an em p loy er to c o n tem p t san cti o n s fo r any f uture vi ol at i ons of the A c t, n o t s im p ly ‘lik e a n d re la te d ’ v io la tio n s .” P e t. B r. a t 2 6 (e m p h a s is a d d e d ). I t s fi ndi ng of pr ocl i vi tyi s bas ed pr i m ar i l yon ( 1) the vi ol at i ons i n thi s cas e, and ( 2) hi s t or i cal i nform at i on r eques tvi ol at i ons , s om e of w hi ch occ urr ed i n other p a r t s o f th e c o u n tr y. W hil e a cl ose cal l , given ou r s t and ard of revi ew I am sat i sfi ed thatas a w hol e the evi dence s uppor t s a fi ndi ng thatthe A l buquer que di vi s i on of the Pos t al S e rv ic e e n g a g e d in “ p e rs is te n t a tte m p ts b yv a ryin g m e th o d s ” to v io la te th e A c t. I n addi t i on t o the mul t i pl e i nform at i on r eques tvi ol at i ons i n the A l buquer que d ivisi o n , there is ev iden ce inv o lving (1) the P o stal S erv ice’s tr ea tm en t of M r. O rlo v sk yfo r a n e x ten d e d p e rio d o f tim e , an d (2 ) M r. S m ith ’s r e m a rk s to em p loy ee s reg ard ing h is view s ab o u t th e b en efit s g en era ted f rom the fac il ity ’s un i on repr esent at i ves.-4-

H avi ng s ai d that , both the A L J ’ s or derand the N L R B ’ s m odi fi cat i on i m pos e a puni s hm entthats eems i ncomm ens ur at e w i th the cr i m e. A n or der t ai l or ed t o the conduc tati s s ue i s s ur el ym er i t ed. H ow ever , as the di s s ent i ng N L R B m em b er n o ted in this an d a re lat ed ca se in o bjecti n g to “n o fu ture vi ol at i on” or der s , “R eci di vi s m al one . . . i s an i ns uffi ci entbas i s fori m pos i ng a br oad or der . ” Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N L R B N o. 25, *6 ( A ug. 27, 2005) ( Schaumber , di s s ent i ng) . I ns t ead “ the Supr eme C our thas m ade c l earthatbr oad o rde rs m u st be rese rve d fo r eg reg iou s ca ses in w h ich th e v iolati o n s are so sev ere or so num erous and vari ed as t o trulym anifesta gen eral dis regar d fo r em ploy ees’ fundament al empl oy ee r i ght s . ” Uni t ed Stat es P os talSer v. , 345 N L R B N o. 26, *3 n .4 (A u g . 2 7 , 2 0 0 5 )( S c h a u m b e r, d is s e n tin g ). I n the end, I concurbeca us e the N L R B ’ s fi ndi ngs r egar di ng the Pos t al Ser vi ce’ s vi ol at i ons ar e ent i t l ed t o defe r ence , as i s the appr opr i at e l evel of i nj unct i ve r el i ef ba s ed on thes e fa ct s . T he Pos t al Ser vi ce i s ent i t l ed t o s eek m odi fi cat i on of the i nj unct i on as ci r cumst ance s change .