Opinion ID: 570487
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Failure to Follow this Court's Instructions on Remand

Text: 41 This Court unequivocally instructed the Board to disregard evidence of discrimination inferred from Holo-Krome's protected statements of opposition to the Union. Without evidence other than Holo-Krome's protected speech to support a conclusion that a violation occurred, the Board's second opinion constitutes little more than a series of rationalizations to reach an unwarranted result. Based on an evaluation of the evidence, supra, it appears that the Board did, indeed, circumvent the intent of this Court. 42 The first two points the Board made it its initial opinion to show significant evidence of Holo-Krome's animus concern the company's protected conduct during the election. This suggests that the Board considered this evidence quite significant, not a relatively minor factor, as it claimed in its second opinion. It appears that the Board followed this Court's instructions only to the extent that it did not claim to be relying on Holo-Krome's protected statements in finding a violation.