Opinion ID: 627393
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Assistant Nursing Director Kendra White's Statement to LPN Michelle Sands

Text: 55 The Board found that Assistant Nursing Director White's statement to Sands (Look, we didn't ask for this) imparted a threat that linked Sands's support for the union to her placement on the on-call list, thus constituting a separate violation of Sec. 158(a)(1). Specifically, the Board concluded that there can be no other interpretation except that White was saying [the Home] did not ask for the employees to organize a union and therefore the schedule change for Sands and others is what the employees deserved.... The Home challenges this finding, offering a somewhat different, if enigmatic, interpretation of the conversation. As the Home sees it, White was merely advising Sands of the fact [that the Home] was facing a most unusual situation in the context of financial losses, scheduling problems and administrative proceedings. 56 Whatever this means, we find that the Board's interpretation is supported by substantial evidence. Sands's testimony of the incident was unrefuted. White's comment arose in the context of a discussion over a scheduling change that adversely affected Sands, and was cast as a rejoinder to Sands's remark concerning the veracity of Turpin's testimony at a Board hearing. The inference drawn by the Board--that White was specifically referring to the employees' efforts to organize a union and intended to link that endeavor to unfavorable scheduling assignments--is reasonable. By suggesting a connection between union activity and a reduction in Sands's work hours, White's statement amounted to an admission that some employees were getting what the Home considered to be their just desserts.