Union-related discriminatory motivation

AND · 29usc158:union-purpose

The General Counsel bears the initial persuasion burden. Employer knowledge, timing and animus can be evidence; these are not universal extra statutory elements. Group retaliation can reach workers without individual protected activity.

Exact element source

to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization

Source: docroot/ir/usc/title29.jsonl#title29_sec158; Unicode character offsets [739:802] (end exclusive); SHA-256 caadb20cedf4fd4e200812fc0ec46617cc7978ef7a6b0a30e355bccfeb7e0d06.

All variants

Recorded DB variant labels, including zero-count variants
Variant	Description	Merits instance blocks	Distinct cases	Example cases (up to 3 per group)
workforce-retaliation/layoffs-reversible-if-union-backs-off		1 Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 0	1	/f3d/929/0393-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied

How courts decided this element

Annotation blocks, including explicitly excluded context
Case	Element	Holding and scope	Variant	Exact source quotations
/f3d/929/0393-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019	Union-related discriminatory motivation	satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: proved; claim: (a); party: six discharged crane operators; subject: party=six discharged crane operators The court permits proof of retaliation against the workforce rather than requiring individual union activity by every fired worker.	workforce-retaliation/layoffs-reversible-if-union-backs-off	From May to July of 2016, Erickson fired six members of the Local as they completed projects-30% of the company's operators. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_929.jsonl#/f3d/929/0393-01`; Unicode character offsets [3796:3920] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `859f942fccda81455b75cdf787d5a7c40e108f8f20c84015167835c1180ed92b`. Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) The layoffs "could be reversed," he added, if the workers would "get the Union to back off." Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_929.jsonl#/f3d/929/0393-01`; Unicode character offsets [4319:4411] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `859f942fccda81455b75cdf787d5a7c40e108f8f20c84015167835c1180ed92b`. Evidence kind: fact; polarity: supports; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) Substantial evidence supports its conclusion. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_929.jsonl#/f3d/929/0393-01`; Unicode character offsets [6257:6302] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `859f942fccda81455b75cdf787d5a7c40e108f8f20c84015167835c1180ed92b`. Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations

interpretation

In the alternative, it may show that the employer fired employees to retaliate against the workforce as a whole or to discourage union activity.

/f3d/929/0393-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019

In the alternative, it may show that the employer fired employees to retaliate against the workforce as a whole or to discourage union activity.

Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_929.jsonl#/f3d/929/0393-01; Unicode character offsets [5849:5993] (end exclusive); SHA-256 859f942fccda81455b75cdf787d5a7c40e108f8f20c84015167835c1180ed92b.