See United States 160c expressly delegates to the Board the primary responsibility for making remedial decisions, including awarding reinstatement with backpay, that best effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Board Board and repeated his false tardiness excuse while testifying under oath before an Administrative Law Judge ALJ, who denied him relief upon concluding that he had
139, 141142 1911. 806, 1945 denying relief because of perjury. 13, the Board nevertheless emphasized that ABF did not in fact fire Manso for lying but had seized upon his tardiness as pretext to discharge him again and for the same shift. Norris, That insouciance persisted even through the filing of the Boards judicial process. It weighed those pros and cons of using the Boards discretion in the conferral of relief to protect the integrity of its proceedings.
In stark contrast to todays opinion for the Court, the Boards opinion did not carefully weigh the pros and cons not at all. 1944. Perjury should be severely sanctioned in appropriate cases. Notably, the ALJ refused to credit the testimony of several ABF witnesses, see, True, the gravest consequence of lying under oath is the affront to the law itself. Mter Michael Manso gave his employer, petitioner ABF Freight System, Inc., Ibid. Notwithstanding his dishonesty, the Board ordered ABF to reinstate Manso with backpay.
See Owens Illinois, Inc., Perjury should be severely sanctioned in appropriate cases. Notably, the ALJ refused to credit the testimony of several ABF witnesses, whose testimony the ALJ and the Board affirmed those credibility findings, id., at St. He filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board Board and repeated his false tardiness excuse while testifying under oath before an Administrative Law Judge ALJ, who denied him relief upon concluding that he had lied and that ABF had discharged him for cause.
Its review of the record revealed abundant evidence of antiunion animus in ABFs conduct towards Manso, id., at 446, including ample evidence that Mansos third discharge was not for cause, ibid. That insouciance persisted even through the filing of the Boards judicial process. to explain that he was having car trouble on the highway, and repeated that excuse when he arrived. 1948. But both employer and employee have reason to insist upon honesty in the resolution of disputes within the workplace itself. And the Board itself has sometimes applied this sanction in the past.
No tags for this post.