EXCEPTION · 29usc158:protected-speech
Statutory speech protection; prediction versus threat is judicial elaboration. Hendrickson denied enforcement on its particular record, not immunity for all bargaining-from-scratch statements. Section 8(c) is an evidentiary as well as substantive protection throughout the subchapter, limited to noncoercive expression. It does not immunize discriminatory acts merely because they are explained in words.
Exact element source
if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefitSource:
docroot/ir/usc/title29.jsonl#title29_sec158; Unicode character offsets [9974:10054] (end exclusive); SHA-256 caadb20cedf4fd4e200812fc0ec46617cc7978ef7a6b0a30e355bccfeb7e0d06.The expressing of any views, argument, or opinion, or the dissemination thereof, whether in written, printed, graphic, or visual form, shall not constitute or be evidence of an unfair labor practice under any of the provisions of this subchapter, if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit.Source:
docroot/ir/usc/title29.jsonl#title29_sec158; Unicode character offsets [9727:10055] (end exclusive); SHA-256 caadb20cedf4fd4e200812fc0ec46617cc7978ef7a6b0a30e355bccfeb7e0d06.All variants
No variants recorded in this snapshot.
How courts decided this element
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations
interpretation
In order to qualify as lawful advocacy, a prediction that adverse consequences will result "must be carefully phrased on the basis of objective fact."
/f3d/932/0465-01 — United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019
In order to qualify as lawful advocacy, a prediction that adverse consequences will result "must be carefully phrased on the basis of objective fact."Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/f3d_932.jsonl#/f3d/932/0465-01; Unicode character offsets [8135:8285] (end exclusive); SHA-256 abbe12127423758a67ee448afca5b2688080e27f652c231d09d5f6df0dfb14e4.Statutory speech protection; prediction versus threat is judicial elaboration. Hendrickson denied enforcement on its particular record, not immunity for all bargaining-from-scratch statements. Section 8(c) is an evidentiary as well as substantive protection throughout the subchapter, limited to noncoercive expression. It does not immunize discriminatory acts merely because they are explained in words.