Coast Community College District (PERB 0251E)

STATE 	OF 	CALIFORNIA
DECISION 	OF 	THE
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT 	RELATIONS 	BOARD
COAST 	CALIFORNIA 	TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION, CTA/NEA
Charging 	Party,
v.
COAST 	COMMUNITY 	COLLEGE 	DISTRICT,
Respondent.
Case No. 	LA-CE-213
PERB Decision No. 	251
October 15, 	1982
COAST 	CALIFORNIA 	TEACHERS
ASSOCIATION, 	CTA/NEA,
Charging 	Party,
v.
COAST COMMUNITY 	COLLEGE 	DISTRICT,
Respondent.
Case No. 	LA-CE-465
Appearances; 	A. 	Eugene Huguenin, 	Jr., Attorney 	(California
Teachers Association) 	for 	Coast 	California Teachers
Association, CTA/NEA; 	Dennis A. 	Gladwell, Attorney 	(Gibson,
Dunn 	& Crutcher) 	for 	Coast 	Community College District.
Before Gluck, 	Chairperson; Morgenstern and Jensen, Members.
DECISION
GLUCK, 	Chairperson: 	In these cases, 	consolidated for 	a
formal hearing 	and 	appeal, 	the Coast 	California Teachers
Association CTA/NEA 	(CTA) 	alleges 	that 	the Coast Community
College District 	(District) 	violated 	subsections 3543.5(a), 	(b)
and 	(d) 	of 	the 	Educational Employment 	Relations Act 	(EERA)1
1The 	EERA is 	codified 	at Government 	Code 	section 3540, 	et
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_______________ )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
_______________ )

by 	cancelling 	teaching 	assignments 	of 	certain 	employees 	because
of 	their 	union 	activity.2 Both 	parties 	have 	filed 	exceptions
to 	the 	hearing 	officer's proposed 	decision.
seq. 	Unless 	otherwise 	noted 	all 	statutory 	references 	are 	to
the Government Code.
CASE 	LA-CE-213
FACTS
The District 	consists of 	three 	campuses: 	Golden West,
Orange Coast, 	and Coastline Colleges. 	It employs approximately
600 	full-time 	faculty 	and 	900 	part-time 	instructors 	at 	its
Golden West 	and Orange Coast 	campuses. 	The 	part-time
instructors 	teach 	during 	evenings 	and 	weekends. 	Approximately
800 	part-time 	instructors 	teach 	the 	entire 	curriculum at
Coastline.
Employment 	decisions 	of 	part-time 	teachers 	are 	essentially
autonomously made at 	the 	individual colleges. 	For 	example, 	the
dean 	of 	instructional services 	at Golden West 	College
(Loren Moll) 	and 	the 	chairperson of 	the 	technical division at
Orange Coast 	College 	(Bill Abernathy) 	are 	authorized 	to renew
contracts 	and 	to 	cancel classes of part-time 	teachers. 	The
District 	does 	not 	consider 	such 	cancellations 	or 	failures 	to
renew 	contracts 	to be discharges 	for 	cause 	and 	the 	campuses 	are
not 	required 	to 	receive 	approval 	for 	such 	action 	from 	the
District's 	vice 	chancellor 	of 	employment 	relations.
2A charge 	that 	one 	teacher 	received 	adverse 	performance
evaluations 	for 	this 	reason 	was dismissed 	by 	the 	hearing
officer 	and 	not 	raised 	on 	appeal 	by 	exception. 	See Government
Code 	section 	32300.
2

In 1976, 	CTA began organizing 	to become 	the exclusive
representative 	of 	all 	of 	the District's 	certificated
employees. 	Its efforts 	concentrated on part-time 	teachers 	and
their 	apparent 	lack 	of 	job security. 	Part-time 	instructors 	are
employed 	on 	a 	one-semester 	basis 	conditioned 	upon 	sufficient
class 	enrollment, 	the possibility of being 	"bumped" 	by 	a
full-time 	faculty member 	who 	is 	in 	need of 	a class 	and 	the
District's 	determination 	that 	continuation 	of 	the 	class 	is 	not
desirable. 	In 1977, 	the American Federation of Teachers 	(AFT)
filed 	a petition 	to 	represent 	all 	certificated 	employees 	of 	the
District. 	CTA 	filed 	an 	intervention petition which 	closely
paralleled 	that 	of 	the AFT. 	The District opposed 	both
petitions preferring 	separate 	units 	for 	full-time 	and 	part-time
employees.
In October 	1977, 	CTA created 	a 	ten-member 	campaign
committee 	that 	included 	six 	part-time 	instructors:
Christine Maitland, 	Alan Webber, 	Juliette Graff,
Garnet Sandeen, 	George Willard 	and Carol Kingsberg.
Maitland 	and 	Webber
In December 	1977, 	Moll decided 	to cancel Philosophy 	100
which 	was 	one of 	two classes 	that Maitland 	was 	scheduled 	to
teach 	in 	the 	coming 	spring 	1978 	semester. 	Maitland 	had 	begun
teaching 	philosophy on a part-time 	basis 	in 	the District 	in
1974 	and 	was 	one 	of 	two 	part-time philosophy 	instructors,
Webber 	being 	the other, 	at Golden West College. 	There were
three 	full-time philosophy 	teachers 	at 	that 	campus.
3

Maitland maintained 	a visible 	profile 	as 	a 	union 	activist.
She 	participated 	in 	the 	CTA organizing 	campaign 	from 	its
inception 	and 	was 	selected 	as 	chair 	of 	the CTA organizing
committee 	in October 	1977. 	She 	attended 	and 	spoke 	at several
on-campus meetings 	where part-time 	issues 	were discussed. 	At 	a
joint 	academic 	senate 	- Board 	of Trustees meeting 	in
December 	1977 	she 	debated District 	officials 	on 	a matter 	which
had 	appeared 	in the CTA newsletter, 	for 	which 	she was 	a
principal 	writer. 	She 	also 	represented CTA 	in 	certain
proceedings 	before 	this Board 	in 	1977 	and 	lobbied on 	behalf 	of
her 	organization 	before 	the 	California Legislature.
In February and May 1977, 	Maitland, 	Graff 	and Sandeen had
set 	up organizing 	stations 	in 	front of 	the 	faculty mailboxes 	at
Golden West 	and 	Orange 	Coast 	Colleges 	where 	literature 	was
distributed 	to 	the 	faculty 	and 	signatures 	in support of CTA
were 	solicited. 	Each person 	had 	a name 	tag 	which 	clearly
identified CTA, 	and 	a large 	brightly 	colored 	sign 	that 	said
"CTA/NEA Faculty Power" 	was 	displayed 	at 	their 	stations. 	At
Golden West College 	the 	administration offices 	were 	adjacent 	to
this 	distribution 	site.
It 	is Maitland's 	contention 	that 	college officials,
including Moll 	and his 	assistant, 	Bill Foley, 	had 	noticed her
at 	the 	CTA organizing 	station 	as 	they 	walked 	to 	and 	from 	their
offices. 	Moll 	testified 	that 	he 	does 	not 	remember 	CTA's
distribution 	activities. 	He claimed 	that 	if 	he did meet 	or
4

converse 	with organizers 	he 	did 	not 	realize 	what 	they were
doing 	since 	he 	regularly 	saw 	them 	and 	exchanged 	pleasantries
going 	to 	and 	from his office.
He 	further 	claims 	that 	he 	cannot 	remember 	having
discussions 	with 	anyone 	about Maitland's 	organizing 	activities
or 	even 	whether 	she 	was 	involved 	with CTA or 	not. 	He 	knew 	that
she 	was 	a member 	of 	the 	organization 	but 	did 	not 	recall when 	he
learned 	of 	this 	fact. 	He 	attended 	no meetings when Maitland
spoke 	and 	denies 	having 	ever 	discussed CTA activities 	with
her. 	He 	received CTA newsletters 	in his mail 	but claims 	that
with 	few exceptions 	he 	did 	not 	read 	them.
Other District officials did, 	however, 	observe Maitland's
activities. 	The 	assistant 	dean of 	the 	evening program 	at
Golden West 	attended 	a December 	1976 	CTA meeting 	and 	the 	dean
of 	educational development, William Shawl, 	attended 	two Board
of 	Trustees 	meetings 	at 	which Maitland 	appeared 	and 	spoke. 	The
president of 	Coastline College 	met Maitland 	in 	Sacramento while
she 	was 	there 	testifying 	before 	an Assembly committee 	and
several 	other 	officials 	saw her 	at 	the PERB 	hearings. 	Further,
Shawl 	kept a 	file of CTA literature 	as well 	as of 	other
organizational materials 	which 	came 	across his 	desk, 	but
contends 	he 	rarely 	read 	the material.
In 	the 	fall of 	1977, 	Maitland 	taught Philosophy 100 and
Philosophy 	109 	and 	was 	scheduled 	to 	teach 	both 	classes 	in 	the
following 	spring 	semester. 	In 	late November Maitland 	realized
un	
5

that 	she 	had 	not yet 	received 	her 	textbook 	requisition 	forms
for 	the 	spring 	semester. 	These 	forms 	serve 	as 	notice 	to 	the
part-time 	faculty 	that 	they will be 	teaching 	in 	that coming
semester. 	Moll's office 	sends 	out 	these 	forms 	except 	to
teachers 	about 	whom division 	chairpersons 	have 	some 	concern.
According 	to Maitland 	she 	called 	the 	division 	chairperson
of 	the 	social science department, Ms. 	Brazier, 	to find out why
her 	notice 	had 	not 	been 	forwarded. 	Brazier's 	secretary
informed 	her 	that 	the 	form had 	been 	held 	up because 	of 	her
evaluations. 	However, 	Brazier 	later 	informed Maitland 	that
there 	were 	no problems 	with 	her 	evaluations 	and 	that Brazier
did 	not 	know 	the 	reason 	for 	the 	delay.3
Maitland 	further 	testified 	that 	several 	days 	later 	Brazier
told 	her 	that 	she 	would 	be 	teaching 	two 	classes 	in 	the 	next
semester 	and 	asked 	if 	she 	would 	like 	to 	teach 	a 	class 	on
"philosophy 	of 	love," 	a class 	that Webber 	was 	scheduled 	to
teach.
On or 	about December 	1, 	Maitland met with Moll. 	By 	the
time 	of 	this 	conversation Moll 	had 	already discussed Maitland's
situation 	with Brazier 	and 	learned 	that 	her 	evaluations 	were
good. 	He 	confirmed 	to Maitland 	that 	she 	would probably be
3Brazier 	did 	not 	testify at 	the 	hearing.
66

teaching 	two classes 	in 	the 	spring 	and 	asked 	if 	she would
consider 	teaching 	the 	philosophy 	of 	love 	class.
On or 	about December 	9, 	Moll met with Brazier 	and 	Shawl who
was 	in charge of 	faculty evaluations. 	This meeting was 	held 	to
discuss 	the 	philosophy 	department 	and 	especially 	whether
Maitland 	and 	Webber 	would 	be 	teaching 	in 	the 	coming 	semester.
During 	this meeting 	reference 	was made 	to 	the 	lack 	of master's
degrees 	among 	part-time 	teachers 	and 	to 	the 	department's
generally 	declining 	enrollment. 	All 	three 	felt 	that Maitland
had 	received 	good 	evaluations 	but Shawl 	felt 	that 	she 	had
overreacted 	in 	a written 	response 	to 	the 	comments of 	one of 	the
evaluators. 	He 	also 	considered Maitland 	to 	be 	under-qualified
because 	she 	did 	not 	have 	a master's 	degree.4 Full-time
teachers 	are 	required 	to 	have 	such 	a 	degree 	and 	Shawl wanted 	to
maintain 	the 	same 	standards 	and 	quality of 	education 	for 	both
the 	day 	and 	evening programs. 	Moll 	responded 	that Maitland 	was
a 	good 	instructor 	and 	indicated 	that 	Brazier's 	opinion
paralleled his.
Over 	the 	previous several semesters, 	the social science
division, 	and 	the philosophy department 	in particular, 	was
experiencing 	declining 	enrollment.5 In 	the 	spring 	of 	1977
4At 	this 	time Maitland 	was 	enrolled 	in 	a PhD program but
did 	not 	have 	a master's 	degree.
5Enrollment 	in 	the 	philosophy 	department 	for 	fall 	1975 	to
fall 1977 was as 	follows:
77

the 	philosophy 	department 	cancelled 	one 	evening 	class 	and 	two
part-time 	teachers 	were 	relieved 	of 	their 	assignment 	by 	a
full-time 	instructor 	whose 	classes 	had 	been 	cancelled 	and 	who
had 	bumping 	rights 	in order 	to maintain 	a 	full 	teaching 	load.
To 	avoid 	a 	recurrence of 	this problem 	in 	the 	forthcoming
semester, 	Moll and 	the 	others 	decided 	to cancel Webber's
evening 	section of 	Philosophy 	125. 	They also discussed 	the
possibility of 	cancelling Maitland's 	Philosophy 	100 	class 	and
Webber's Philosophy 122. 	However, 	no decision was made on
these 	matters 	during 	the 	course 	of 	that 	meeting.
Moll 	finally 	decided 	on December 	14 	to 	cancel both 	classes
because 	of 	the 	generally 	low 	enrollment 	and 	the 	desire 	to
improve 	daytime 	attendance. 	The District 	followed 	a general
policy 	that 	15 	students 	would 	be 	the 	minimum number 	required 	to
avoid 	cancellation of 	a 	part-time 	instructor's 	class 	and 	that
classes 	with 	an 	enrollment 	of 	less 	than 	20 may 	be cancelled.
Day 	Classes
Fall 	1975 	444
Spring 	1976 	414
Fall 	1976 	369
Spring 	1977 	384
Fall 	1977 	369
Evening 	Classes
Fall 1975 	358
Spring 	1976 	285
Fall 1976 	293
Spring 1977 	276
Fall 1977 	250
88

On 	the 	same 	day, 	Moll 	informed Maitland 	that 	she would 	be
teaching 	only one 	class. 	He did 	not 	explain why 	the 	class 	was
cancelled 	and 	claims 	that 	it 	was 	the policy of 	the 	school 	not
to 	impart 	the 	reasons 	for 	such 	action 	to part-time 	teachers.
Maitland 	asserts 	that Moll 	informed 	her 	that 	her 	lack of 	a
master's 	degree 	was 	the 	reason 	for 	the 	cancellation. 	However,
she 	later 	contradicted 	herself 	by 	saying 	that 	she 	did 	not 	learn
why 	the 	class 	was 	cancelled 	until 	the 	PERB 	hearing.
After 	being 	informed 	that 	her 	class 	was 	cancelled, 	Maitland
protested 	to 	the 	District's 	vice 	chancellor 	of 	employee
relations 	and 	to 	the president. 	However, 	Moll's decision was
not 	reversed.
Moll 	also cancelled 	two of Alan Webber's classes. 	He 	had
been 	teaching 	at Golden West 	as 	a part-time 	philosophy
instructor 	since 	1974. 	He 	joined 	CTA 	in 	late January or 	early
February of 	1977. 	His organizational 	activities 	included
attending 	the 	December 	1976 	CTA meeting 	and 	the 	March 	and
December 	1977 	joint 	academic 	senate 	- Board 	of 	Trustees
meetings where 	he 	spoke 	and 	asked 	questions. 	He occasionally
assisted 	in 	stuffing mailboxes 	with 	organizational 	literature
and 	at 	one 	time 	helped 	to print 	and 	distribute 	a newsletter.
In October 	1977 	he 	was 	appointed 	as 	treasurer 	of 	the CTA
organizing 	committee.
In 	the 	spring of 	1977, 	Moll 	replaced Webber 	in a class 	that
he 	had 	been 	assigned 	to 	teach 	with 	a 	full-time 	teacher 	who
9
9

needed 	a class 	to 	round 	out 	his 	schedule. 	Webber 	threatened 	to
file 	a grievance 	and met 	with Garnet 	Sandeen, 	CTA's grievance
representative. 	In March, 	Webber 	dropped 	the grievance,
apparently 	because Moll 	had 	informed 	him 	that 	the 	loss 	of 	his
class 	was 	temporary and 	that 	he 	would 	be 	teaching 	the 	same
course 	during 	the 	following 	semester. 	Moreover, 	Webber 	was
assigned 	to a new class on March 	30, 	1977 	to replace 	a 	teacher
who 	had 	resigned.
In November 	1977 Moll 	suggested 	to Webber 	that 	he 	resign
from 	the District 	for 	having 	falsified 	a 	time 	card. 	Webber 	had
turned 	in a completed 	time 	card 	for 	his October 	31 	class.
Because 	of 	Halloween 	and 	low 	attendance, 	he 	had 	dismissed 	that
class 	early and 	had 	reconvened 	it 	at 	a 	local pizza parlor 	where
a 	philosophy 	discussion 	had 	ensued. 	upon 	discovering 	that 	the
class 	was 	vacant 	before 	the 	end 	of 	the 	scheduled period 	and
that Webber 	had 	reported 	on 	his 	time 	card 	that 	he 	had 	taught
the 	full 	three 	hours, Moll called Webber 	into his office.
Webber 	contends 	that Moll 	immediately 	requested 	his 	resignation
but Moll disputes 	this 	and 	said 	that 	he 	only 	requested 	the
resignation 	after 	Webber 	told 	him 	that 	he 	did 	not 	dismiss 	his
class 	until 	9:15 or 	9:30 	p.m. 	He claims 	that 	he 	terminated
people 	in 	the 	past 	for 	similar 	conduct 	and 	asserts 	that 	if
Webber 	had 	been more 	forthright 	he 	would 	have 	only demanded
that 	he 	correct 	the 	time 	card.
10

Webber 	appealed 	the 	resignation 	request 	to 	the 	vice
chancellor 	for 	employee 	relations 	who 	decided 	that 	the
resignation 	was 	unnecessary 	since 	Webber 	lacked 	an 	intent 	to
falsify 	the 	card.
Subsequently, 	on November 	14, 	a CTA newsletter 	reported
Webber's 	version of 	the 	incident. 	Moll 	acknowledges 	that he
read 	the 	story when 	it was 	brought 	to his 	attention.
Webber 	had 	been 	evaluated 	twice 	during 	the 	fall 	1977
semester. 	On one 	evaluation he 	received 	"needs 	improvement" 	in
two of nine 	areas, 	but was 	rated 	"satisfactory" 	overall. 	The
evaluator, 	a sociology professor, 	suggested 	that he was 	not
necessarily 	competent 	to 	conduct 	an 	evaluation of 	a philosophy
instructor 	and 	suggested 	that 	a 	second 	evaluation 	be
conducted. 	The 	second 	evaluator 	recommended 	that Webber 	was 	in
need 	of overall 	improvement 	and 	was 	deficient 	in 	four 	areas.
Prior 	to 	these 	occasions, 	Webber 	had 	received 	satisfactory
evaluations.
Moll 	decided 	to cancel Webber's 	Philosophy 	125 	class,
assertedly because of 	low 	enrollment, 	on December 	9. 	The class
had 	been 	offered 	in 	both 	day 	and 	evening 	sessions 	in 	the
previous 	semester 	and both 	classes 	had 	enrollments 	of 	less 	than
14 	students. 	Moll 	testified 	that 	the 	administration 	felt 	that
it 	would 	be 	wise 	to 	cancel 	the 	evening 	class 	in 	the 	hopes 	that
it would 	improve 	the daytime enrollment. 	On December 	14, 	Moll
cancelled Webber's other 	class, 	Philosophy 122, 	for 	the same
11

reason, 	although 	this course 	was 	not 	scheduled 	to be offered
during 	the day. 	Again, 	Moll 	did 	not 	inform Webber 	of 	the
reasons 	for 	his decisions, 	assertedly 	in 	accordance with
District 	policy. 	Moll 	cancelled 	approximately 	28 	to 	30 	classes
for 	the 	spring 	semester 	and 	during 	that 	semester 	more 	than 	500
other 	classes 	were 	cancelled 	throughout 	the District.
With 	the 	cancellation of Webber's 	and Maitland's 	classes,
Maitland's 	remaining 	course 	was 	the 	only 	philosophy 	course
scheduled 	to be 	taught by a part-time 	instructor. 	However, 	in
January of 	1978, 	the District held 	interviews 	for 	a part-time
instructor 	to 	teach Philosophy 	111, 	assertedly because 	the
full-time 	teacher 	scheduled 	to 	teach 	that 	class 	was 	unable 	to
do 	so. 	A 	full-time 	teacher 	and mentor 	to Maitland 	and Webber
testified 	that, 	contrary 	to 	standard District policy, 	no 	job
announcement 	had 	been circulated within 	the 	department; 	rather,
the 	division 	sent 	out letters 	to potential applicants. 	Neither
Maitland 	nor 	Webber 	was 	offered 	the 	opportunity 	to 	apply 	for
the 	job. 	There 	is 	no evidence 	in the 	record 	to 	indicate 	that
they were qualified 	to 	teach 	the 	class. 	To 	the contrary,
Webber's 	second 	evaluator 	testified 	that 	he 	did 	not 	think
either 	teacher 	was qualified.
Graff
Graff 	began 	teaching 	Spanish 	in 	the 	District as 	a part-time
instructor 	in 	the 	fall of 	1976. 	She 	joined CTA 	in December 	of
that 	year 	and 	her 	activities 	on 	behalf 	of 	the 	union 	included
12

attending 	the 	December 	1976 	CTA meeting 	and 	the March 	1977
academic 	senate 	- Board 	of 	Trustees 	meeting 	though 	she 	did 	not
speak 	at either 	affair. 	She did participate 	in 	the
solicitation 	and 	distribution 	efforts 	at Golden West 	campus.
She 	testified 	that 	she 	remembers 	seeing Moll 	and 	other
administrators 	while 	she 	was performing 	in 	this 	function. 	She
became 	a member 	of 	the 	organizing 	committee 	in October 	1977 	and
helped 	to prepare 	a CTA organizing 	luncheon.
Moll disclaims 	any 	knowledge 	of 	Graff's 	CTA membership or
activity prior 	to January of 	1978 	when 	he met 	with her 	and 	her
CTA grievance 	representative 	concerning 	her 	termination. 	Moll
testified 	that 	his 	decision 	not 	to 	reemploy Graff 	was 	based 	on
a 	recommendation of 	the 	communications 	division 	chairperson 	who
had 	earlier 	recommended 	Graff's 	dismissal 	in 	both 	the 	spring
and 	fall 	semesters of 	1977. 	Of 	the 	40 	to 45 	teachers 	in 	this
division, 	the 	chairperson considered Graff 	to be one of 	the
three or 	four 	weakest.
Moll 	had 	not 	followed 	the 	chairperson's 	original
recommendations 	because 	in 	the 	spring of 	1977 	he 	had 	already
notified 	Graff 	that 	she 	would 	be 	reemployed 	and 	felt morally
bound 	to honor 	this 	notice, 	and 	in 	the 	fall Graff 	had
threatened Moll 	with 	a Title VII 	suit 	and Moll 	wanted 	to 	be
sure 	that 	he 	could properly 	document 	her 	dismissal 	before
taking 	such 	action.
13

During 	the 	evaluation period 	in 	the 	fall of 	1977, 	a
full-time 	Spanish 	instructor 	was 	assigned 	to observe Graff's
performance. 	This 	instructor 	concurred with 	the 	chairperson's
opinion 	that 	Graff was 	a weak 	teacher. 	Moll 	indicated 	that
this 	information was 	one of 	the 	bases 	for 	his 	decision 	not 	to
reemploy 	Graff.
Sandeen
Sandeen 	had 	been 	a part-time 	aviation 	teacher 	in 	the
District 	since 	1965, 	teaching 	at both Orange Coast 	and Golden
West 	colleges. 	He 	joined CTA 	in 	1976 	and 	later 	became chair 	of
its grievance 	committee 	and 	a member 	of 	its 	organizing 	campaign
committee. 	He 	had 	represented 	other 	employees 	before 	various
District 	administrators 	and 	had 	participated 	in 	the 	spring 	1977
CTA 	literature 	distribution 	campaign.
Bill Abernathy 	became 	aware 	of 	Sandeen's 	activities 	with
CTA when 	he 	attended 	a CTA 	function 	in November 	1977.
Abernathy, 	himself, 	has been a member of CTA for over 	16 years
and 	served 	for 	several years 	as 	its 	counsel 	representative 	at
Coast College.
In 	the 	fall 	of 	1977 	two 	aviation 	instructors 	were 	assigned
to 	evaluate 	Sandeen. 	The 	events 	surrounding 	the 	evaluation 	are
in dispute. 	Sandeen 	claims 	that procedures 	followed 	by 	the
evaluators 	were 	irregular 	because 	they 	came 	into his 	classroom
unannounced 	to 	conduct 	an 	unscheduled 	evaluation, 	interrupted
his 	class 	and 	told him 	that 	they 	had 	the power 	to hire 	and 	fire
14

him. 	He 	informed 	them 	that 	he 	was 	going 	to 	talk with CTA and
the 	college 	president 	about 	these 	alleged 	inproprieties.
The 	evaluators 	acknowledged 	that 	they 	entered 	the 	classroom
unannounced 	but 	contend 	that 	the 	division 	had 	notified 	Sandeen
that 	the 	evaluation visits 	were going 	to 	take place. 	The
evaluators 	attended 	both halves 	of 	the 	three-hour 	class, 	which
was 	unusual, 	but claim 	that 	it was 	necessary because 	there 	had
been 	little 	instruction 	during 	the 	first 	half of 	the 	class.
They 	claim 	that 	after 	the 	class 	they 	had 	asked 	Sandeen 	to 	sit
down 	with 	them 	to discuss 	his 	evaluation 	but 	that Sandeen 	had
refused 	to do 	so 	and 	had 	terminated 	the 	conversation 	by
threatening 	to 	"get" 	the 	evaluators 	by going 	to 	the 	union 	and
the 	college president.
The 	following 	day Sandeen 	went 	to Abernathy 	to protest 	the
evaluation. 	Abernathy 	said 	that he 	could 	not 	do 	anything 	about
the matter 	until 	he 	received 	the evaluations. 	However, 	the
evaluations 	were 	never 	forwarded 	because 	the 	required
conference 	between 	evaluators 	and 	teacher 	did 	not 	occur.
On November 	14 	Sandeen's 	version of 	the 	attempted
evaluation 	and 	his 	discussion 	with Abernathy 	appeared 	in 	the
CTA newspaper 	without 	identifying 	the participants. 	On
January 4, 	1978 Abernathy wrote 	two 	letters 	to Sandeen. 	In 	the
first 	he 	told Sandeen that he was 	bothered 	by 	the misquotes 	in
the 	CTA news 	account 	of 	their 	meeting 	and 	by his 	name 	not 	(sic)
being mentioned. 	He 	testified 	that 	he 	felt 	that 	the 	article
15

implied 	that he was 	insensitive 	to 	the problems of 	teachers.
The 	hearing 	officer 	observed 	that Abernathy 	was 	still 	quite
agitated 	about 	this 	incident 	during 	the 	hearing.
The 	second 	letter 	informed 	Sandeen 	that 	the 	division 	had 	to
cancel his Air 	132, 	class which was 	to be offered 	in the
spring, 	because 	of 	the 	unavailability of 	classroom 	facilities
and 	the low 	retention of 	students 	in his 	fall course.
Abernathy 	testified 	that 	he 	typically 	does 	not 	inform part-time
teachers of 	the 	reason 	for 	class 	cancellations, 	claiming 	that
this 	has 	been 	the 	procedure 	in 	the 	District during 	his 	tenure
of 	16 years. 	However, 	in this 	instance, 	he did 	inform Sandeen.
Abernathy 	had 	initially 	intended 	to 	offer 	two 	sections 	of
Air 	132, 	one 	day 	and 	one 	evening. 	Sandeen 	had 	received 	a
notice 	of 	employment 	in October 	and 	a 	textbook 	requisition
form. 	However, 	in mid 	to late November, 	the associate dean of
instruction 	informed Abernathy 	that 	the 	division 	had 	lost 	a
classroom 	and 	that 	consequently 	three of 	the 	department's
scheduled 	classes 	were 	without 	rooms. 	The 	dean 	testified 	that
final 	schedules 	had 	to be 	turned 	in 	to 	the printer 	between
November 	20th 	and 	23rd 	and 	that 	he 	had 	just 	a 	few days 	to 	find
classrooms or 	the 	classes 	would 	have 	to be 	deleted 	from 	the
schedule. 	His 	staff 	did 	locate 	two 	rooms 	and Abernathy was
then 	required 	to decide 	which 	two courses 	the 	college 	would
offer. 	Abernathy 	testified 	that 	he 	decided 	to cancel Sandeen's
16

class because 	it was 	the 	only one of 	three courses 	that had 	two
sections.
Abernathy 	also 	testified 	that 	while 	the 	lack 	of 	classrooms
was 	the paramount 	reason 	for 	his 	decision, 	the 	low 	retention
rate 	of 	students 	Sandeen 	had 	experienced 	in 	the 	fall 	of 	1977
was 	an 	additional 	factor. 	Sandeen's 	class 	in 	the previous
semester 	had 	only 	11 	students 	though 	it 	had 	an 	initial
enrollment of 	approximately 	24.
Sandeen 	testified 	that 	he 	then met 	with 	the 	president 	and
dean 	concerning 	his 	evaluation 	and 	was 	told 	that 	the CTA
bulletin 	had 	had 	some 	effect 	on 	the 	administration's 	position.
According 	to Sandeen, 	the president confirmed 	this 	by 	saying
that 	a wall 	had 	been 	drawn 	between 	Sandeen 	and 	the
administration by that article. 	The dean, 	however, 	testified
that 	the 	discussion with 	Sandeen 	had 	been 	over 	his 	evaluation
and 	that 	he 	and 	the president 	had 	commented 	that 	the 	newspaper
article 	"did 	not 	tend 	to 	lighten 	the 	situation" 	and 	that 	"it
was 	not 	the 	best 	way 	to establish 	good 	relations with 	the 	two
evaluators." 	He 	further 	stated 	that 	he 	never 	indicated 	to
Sandeen 	that 	his 	involvement 	in CTA 	activities 	affected 	his
assignments.
Despite 	the 	cancellation of his 	Orange Coast 	class, 	Sandeen
nevertheless 	continued 	to 	teach 	at Golden West 	College 	during
the 	spring of 	1978.
17

Hearing 	Officer's 	Proposed 	Decision
The 	hearing 	officer 	found Maitland's 	involvement 	in CTA
activities 	to be 	substantial 	and 	the 	cancellation of 	her 	class
by 	the 	District 	to 	be 	inherently 	destructive of 	employee 	rights
and 	therefore 	in violation of 	section 3543.5(a) 	and 	(b). 	He
found 	that Abernathy 	had 	cancelled 	Sandeen's 	1978 	class 	because
of 	Sandeen's organizational 	activities, 	and particularly
because 	of 	the 	CTA article 	concerning 	Sandeen's 	evaluation. 	He
found a 	similar 	violation of 	section 3543.5 (a) 	and 	(b) 	here.
The 	hearing 	officer 	found 	Webber's 	CTA 	activity 	to 	be
limited 	and 	the 	harm 	to employee 	rights 	therefore 	slight.
Although 	he 	found 	the District's 	justification 	to 	be
pretextual, 	he 	found 	other 	sufficient 	legal 	justification 	for
its decision to cancel the class. 	Like Webber, 	Graff's
activities 	were 	found 	to 	be minimal 	and 	consequential 	harm 	to
employee's 	rights 	slight 	and 	outweighed 	by 	the District's
justification of 	not 	wanting 	to 	retain 	a 	teacher 	it 	considered
to be weak.
CTA's 	Position
CTA excepts 	to 	the 	hearing 	officer's 	failure 	to 	find 	that
the District 	violated 	the Act 	by 	cancelling Webber's 	classes
and 	failing 	to 	rehire Graff. 	The 	union contends 	that 	the
hearing officer 	erred 	(1) 	by 	not 	finding 	that 	the District 	and
its 	agents 	collectively 	conspired 	to 	discriminate 	against 	CTA
by 	reducing 	or 	eliminating 	the 	class 	loads of 	union organizers;
18

(2) 	by 	not 	finding 	that 	the District 	harbored 	improper motives
when 	it acted 	against all 	four 	employees; 	(3) 	by not 	finding
that 	the District's 	conduct 	taken in toto was 	inherently
destructive 	and 	(4) 	by 	finding 	that 	the 	business 	justification
proffered 	by 	the District 	was 	sufficient 	to outweigh 	the 	harm
caused 	by 	the 	actions 	against Webber 	and 	Graff.
The District's 	Position
The 	District 	excepts 	to 	the 	hearing 	officer's 	findings:
(1) 	that 	the CTA bulletin concerning Sandeen's 	evaluation was 	a
motivating 	factor 	in the cancellation of his classes; 	(2) 	that
the District's proffered 	justifications 	for 	his 	class
cancellation were 	vague 	and 	subjective 	and 	(3) 	that Maitland's
class 	cancellations 	caused 	inherently 	destructive 	harm 	to
employee 	rights.
DISCUSSION
For 	the 	forthcoming 	reasons 	the Board dismisses 	the 	charge
in 	its 	entirety.
In Carlsbad Unified 	School District 	(1/30/79) 	PERB Decision
No. 	89/ 	the Board 	set forth 	the 	test 	for 	determining when
employer 	actions 	interfere 	with 	the 	rights 	of 	employees
guaranteed 	by 	the Act. 	Subsequently, 	in Novato Unified School
District 	(4/30/82) 	PERB Decision No. 	210, 	the Board clarified
Carlsbad 	by 	setting 	forth 	a 	test 	to be 	applied 	in 	specific
cases 	of 	alleged 	discrimination 	or 	reprisal 	against 	employees
for 	their 	participation 	in protected 	activities. 	The
19

distinction between 	"interference" 	and 	"discrimination" 	cases
is 	often 	blurred. 	Discrimination 	against 	organizers 	clearly
interferes with 	the 	right of 	employees 	to 	form and participate
in 	employee 	organizations. 	The 	facts 	here 	lend 	themselves
either 	to a Carlsbad or 	a Novato 	analysis. 	The 	termination of
the 	services 	of 	four 	of 	the 	six part-time 	teachers 	on 	the
organizing 	committee 	in 	the 	spring of 	1979 	potentially
interfered 	with 	the 	exercise 	of protected 	rights 	of 	all 	unit
employees. 	At 	the 	same 	time 	it 	arguably 	constituted
discrimination 	and 	reprisal 	against 	the 	individuals 	because 	of
their 	organizing 	and 	other 	activities 	on 	behalf 	of 	CTA.
Interference 	Charge;
The 	record 	indicates 	that 	the District's 	actions 	against
the 	four 	employees 	caused 	or 	tended 	to cause 	at most 	only
slight harm to the employees' 	right to organize. 	Maitland, 	the
most 	active of 	the 	four 	employees, 	continued 	to 	teach 	at Golden
West, 	teaching one class 	in the 	spring 1978 	and 	two classes 	in
the 	fall of 	1978, 	and to have 	access 	to employees at 	the
campuses 	as well as 	to be a CTA activist.
Sandeen did lose 	his position 	at 	Orange Coast 	but continued
to 	teach 	at Golden West 	as well 	as 	to 	serve 	as chair 	of 	the
grievance 	committee of 	the 	organization 	and 	to 	represent
employees 	on a District-wide 	basis. 	The 	record 	further
indicates 	that 	Sandeen's 	organizing 	activities 	had 	been 	limited
since May 	1977, 	well before 	losing 	his position.
20

Webber's 	and Graff's 	activities 	on behalf 	of 	the 	union
apparently 	did 	terminate 	with 	the 	end 	of 	their 	employment.
However, 	their 	organizational 	activities 	were minimal,
especially 	during 	the 	six 	months 	immediately 	preceding 	their
departure 	from 	the 	campuses.
CTA 	has 	presented 	no 	evidence 	that 	the District's 	actions
tended 	to 	have 	a 	chilling 	effect on 	the 	exercise 	of 	employee
rights. 	The cancellation of classes 	of Maitland, 	Sandeen and
Webber 	was 	not 	unique. 	In 	the 	spring 	1978 	semester, 	Golden
West, 	Orange Coast 	and Coastline Colleges 	in combination
cancelled over 	500 such classes. 	Accordingly, 	it cannot be
assumed 	that 	teachers 	in general would 	conclude 	that 	the
cancellation of 	these 	three 	teachers' 	classes 	was 	based on
their 	union 	activity 	and 	that 	the 	exercise 	of 	employee 	rights
was 	hazardous 	and 	likely 	to 	result 	in 	adverse 	employer 	action.
Similarly, 	Graff 	was 	not 	the 	only 	teacher 	who was 	not 	rehired
for 	the 	spring 	semester.
Further, 	accepting 	that 	some 	slight 	harm did 	result 	from
the employer's 	actions, 	the Board, 	upon application of 	the
balancing 	test 	set 	forth 	in Carlsbad, 	reaches 	the 	same
conclusion.
The 	District's 	asserted 	justification 	for 	the 	cancellation
of Maitland's 	and Webber's 	philosophy 	classes 	was 	low
enrollment. 	We do not 	find, 	as did 	the 	hearing officer, 	that
this 	justification was pretextual. 	The 	hearing officer 	based
21

his 	conclusion on 	the 	facts 	that 	some 	other 	low-enrollment
classes 	had 	not 	been 	cancelled. 	He 	concluded 	that 	this 	action
was 	inconsistent with Moll's 	asserted 	policy of 	increasing
daytime 	enrollment.
With one 	exception, 	the 	low-enrollment 	classes which were
continued 	were 	taught 	by 	full-time 	instructors 	who 	would 	have
been paid 	if 	the 	classes 	had 	been 	cancelled. 	Philosophy 111,
the exception, 	was 	originally 	to be 	taught 	by a 	full-time
instructor 	who 	withdrew 	and 	was 	replaced 	by 	a 	new part-time
teacher.
Moll 	was 	not 	called 	upon 	by CTA 	to 	explain 	the 	latter
matter 	nor 	did 	he 	volunteer 	an explanation. 	By 	itself, 	Moll's
decision 	cannot 	be considered 	pretextual, 	particularly 	in view
of 	the 	contrary opinion of Webber's 	second 	evaluator, 	and 	the
fact 	that CTA's 	leading activist, 	Maitland, 	was 	retained on an
evening 	schedule.
In 	summary, 	the Board 	finds 	that 	the District's proffered
explanation 	for 	its 	actions 	was 	reasonable 	and 	legitimate 	and
outweighed 	the 	harm done 	to employee 	rights 	by 	the 	cancellation
of Maitland's 	class.
Similarly, 	we cannot 	find 	that 	the 	justification 	for
cancelling 	Sandeen's 	class 	was pretextual. 	The 	evidence was
uncontroverted 	that 	the 	department 	lacked 	the 	facilities 	to
accommodate 	the 	three 	classes 	originally 	planned 	and 	that
Air 	132, 	Sandeen's class 	that was cancelled, 	was 	the only one
that 	had 	two 	sections.
22

There 	is 	no 	evidence 	to 	refute 	the District's 	claim 	that
its 	failure 	to 	renew 	Graff's 	contract was 	due 	to her 	undisputed
poor 	evaluations.
Discrimination 	and 	Reprisal
In summary, 	despite 	the 	inconsistency 	noted 	above, 	we 	find
the District's proffered 	business 	justification 	to be 	both
reasonable and 	legitimate 	and 	to outweigh 	the 	harm, 	if 	any, 	to
the employees' 	rights under 	the Act.
Application 	of 	the 	criteria established 	in Novato
inevitably lead 	to 	the 	same 	conclusions. 	Absent a 	finding of
inherently 	destructive 	employer 	conduct,6 a 	finding 	of
anti-union motive must 	be 	established 	by pertinent 	evidence.
Novato, 	supra. 	The 	record 	fails 	to support 	such 	a finding.
CTA's 	assertion 	that 	a 	conspiracy among 	District 	officials
existed 	is 	unfounded. 	The 	decisions 	to cancel and/or 	not
rehire Maitland, 	Webber, 	Graff 	and Sandeen were made 	by Moll
and Abernathy 	respectively 	at 	the 	local college 	levels. 	There
was 	no 	input 	from District officials. 	Abernathy consulted with
no one 	regarding 	his 	decision 	to cancel Sandeen's class while
Moll 	received 	recommendations 	from Brazier, 	Shawl 	and 	the
communications 	department 	chairperson 	who 	spoke 	with Moll
during 	the 	course of 	their 	regular 	job duties. 	There 	is 	no
6The 	Board 	has 	not 	yet 	defined 	the 	term 	"inherently
destructive." 	It 	finds 	no 	need 	for 	a definition here 	having
found 	that 	the harm, 	if 	any, 	was 	slight. 	See NLRB v. 	Great
Dane Trailers, Inc. 	(1967) 	388 U.S. 	26 	[65 LRRM 2465].
23

evidence 	that 	the 	discussions 	involved 	CTA or 	the 	employees'
activities 	on 	behalf 	of 	that 	organization or 	that 	these
administrators 	harbored 	anti-union 	animus.
It may 	be 	argued 	that 	the 	proximity 	in 	time 	between 	the
employees' organizational 	activity 	and 	the 	District's 	actions
and 	the 	District's 	inconsistent 	justification 	constitute
circumstantial evidence 	of 	improper 	motive. 	However, 	none 	of
this 	evidence 	is 	so clear 	or 	persuasive 	that 	it permits 	a
reasonable 	inference of 	such motive. 	The 	evidence 	that
protected 	activity was 	a motivating 	factor 	in 	the 	District's
decision with 	respect 	to Graff 	is 	even more 	limited, 	simply
that 	the District may have 	had 	knowledge 	of 	her 	activities.
The 	publication of 	the 	evaluation 	incident 	concerning
Sandeen 	in 	the CTA newspaper 	did 	seem 	to 	impact 	on 	the 	attitude
toward 	Sandeen. 	But, 	accepting 	that CTA has 	thus 	established
unlawful animus 	towards 	this 	employee, 	the question 	remains
whether 	the District would have, 	nonetheless, 	made 	the 	same
decision 	to cancel his class. 	Novato, 	supra. 	As we have
previously 	indicated, 	Abernathy's 	decision 	to 	cancel Air 	132
appears 	to 	have 	been 	reasonably 	based 	on 	the existence 	of 	a
room shortage 	and 	the 	fact 	that 	this 	was 	the 	only one of 	the
three 	courses 	that 	had 	two 	sections. 	In view of 	this
legitimate 	explanation 	for 	the 	District's 	action with 	respect
to Sandeen, 	the 	union's 	burden of proving 	that 	but 	for 	the
District's 	animus 	toward Sandeen, 	his class 	would 	not 	have 	been
cancelled 	has 	not 	been met.
24

ORDER
Based 	upon 	the 	record 	in 	this 	case 	and 	the parties'
exceptions 	and 	responses, 	the Board ORDERS 	that 	unfair 	practice
charge LA-CE-213 	filed 	by 	the Coast 	California Teachers
Association, 	CTA/NEA, 	against 	the Coast Community College
District 	be DISMISSED.
CASE 	LA-CE-465
On April 	30, 	1979, 	CTA filed this charge alleging 	that 	the
District violated 	subsections 3543.5(a) 	and 	(b) 	and 	(d) 	by
effectively 	discharging 	Maitland 	and 	Sandeen 	through
cancellation 	and 	reassignment 	of 	their 	classes.7
FACTS
After 	the 	cancellation of Philosophy 100 	in 	1978, Maitland
continued 	to 	teach Philosophy 109 	at Golden West College 	in 	the
spring 	and 	fall 	of 	the 	1978 	semesters. 	She was 	scheduled 	to
teach 	the 	same 	course 	in 	the 	spring of 	1979 	but
Dean 	Frank 	Shawl8 	cancelled 	the 	class 	on 	the Friday prior 	to
the 	first 	day of 	instruction because 	it 	had 	a pre-enrollment 	of
only 	two 	students.
7The 	charge 	was 	later 	amended 	to 	include 	another 	employee
but 	this 	aspect of 	the 	charge 	was withdrawn prior 	to hearing.
8In 	the 	period 	intervening 	between 	the 	hearings 	of
LA-CE-213 	and 	the 	instant 	decision, 	a 	reorganization of
instructional 	services 	occurred 	at 	the Golden West 	campus.
25

Shawl 	testified 	that 	the 	school began a 	new policy 	during
this 	semester 	of cancelling 	courses 	before 	the 	first 	day of
instruction, 	having 	learned 	that 	it was 	not 	economically wise
to 	let 	registration proceed 	in 	the 	face of 	low enrollment. 	He
claimed 	that 	experience 	had 	demonstrated 	that 	a 	class 	would-. .
generally 	lose 	a certain percentage 	of 	its 	first 	day 	enrollment.
The 	college 	also 	cancelled 	classes of 	other 	instructors
where 	there 	were 	pre-enrollments 	of eight or 	nine 	students. 	It
did 	not 	cancel 	classes of 	certain 	full-time 	teachers whose
initial enrollments were 	16, 	14 and 9 	respectively. 	Shawl
contended 	that 	he 	did 	not 	cancel 	these 	classes because 	the
full-time 	teachers 	were 	under 	contract 	and 	would 	have 	had 	to 	be
paid 	their 	full 	salary 	regardless 	of 	whether 	they 	taught 	that
class or 	not.
After 	cancelling Maitland's class, 	the 	philosophy
department 	employed 	no part-time 	instructors. 	Maitland 	argued
that 	the 	District 	had 	deliberately 	tried 	to 	undermine 	her
enrollment 	by moving 	her 	class 	from Monday 	to Wednesday 	nights
and 	by not 	listing 	her 	name 	in 	the 	class 	schedule. 	She 	stated
that 	her 	class 	was 	the 	only 	one which 	had 	its 	time 	changed 	to
another 	night.
Shawl 	responded 	that 	there 	was 	no guarantee 	that 	classes
would 	be offered 	on 	the 	same 	day of 	each year 	and 	that
scheduling 	will 	vary depending 	on 	the 	number 	of 	courses 	planned
to be offered 	and 	the 	number 	of 	rooms 	available. 	He 	further
26

asserted 	that 	since 	becoming 	dean 	it 	had 	been his practice 	not
to 	include 	the 	names 	of part-time 	teachers 	in 	the class
schedules.
As 	a consequence 	of 	the 	cancellation, 	Maitland did 	not
teach 	in 	the 	spring of 	1979. 	Instead 	she became 	a paid 	staff
representative 	of CTA. 	She 	did 	return 	to 	teaching 	in 	the 	fall
of 	1979, 	teaching 	two classes 	at Orange Coast College.
After 	the cancellation of his Air 	132 class, 	Sandeen
continued 	to 	teach Air 	130 	at Golden West 	College 	in 	the 	spring
and 	fall 	semesters 	of 1978. 	He was 	scheduled 	to 	teach 	the
course 	again 	in 	the 	spring of 	1979 	but 	the college 	replaced 	him
with 	a 	full-time 	teacher 	who 	needed 	the 	course 	hours 	in order
to 	complete his 	required 	work 	schedule.
Moll, 	who 	had 	now become 	the 	dean 	of 	business 	technology
and 	public 	service, 	had 	cancelled 	approximately 	18 	hours of
courses 	that 	were 	scheduled 	to 	be 	taught 	by 	full-time 	teachers
.in 	the 	institute. 	Consequently, 	he 	had 	to make 	reassignments
which 	affected 	the 	scheduled 	classes 	of part-time 	instructors
as 	a 	result of 	the 	full-time 	teachers' 	bumping 	rights.
One 	of 	the 	full-time 	teachers 	in need 	of class 	hours 	had
the 	necessary 	credentials 	to 	teach Air 	132 	and was 	assigned 	to
teach 	two 	sections 	of 	the 	course, 	displacing Sandeen 	and
another 	part-time 	instructor. 	As a consequence, 	the 	aviation
department 	had 	no part-time 	instructors 	teaching 	during 	that
semester.
27

afraid 	she 	was going 	to lose 	her 	job 	and 	did 	not 	want 	to be
active 	in any 	sense. 	This 	hearsay evidence 	was 	never
corroborated. 	We 	further 	note 	that CTA, 	although 	it lost 	the
full-time 	unit 	election, 	did win 	the 	representational 	rights
among 	part-time 	instructors 	who 	allegedly 	had 	been 	"chilled" 	by
the District's 	actions.
ORDER
Based on 	the 	entire 	record 	in 	this 	case 	and 	the 	parties'
exceptions 	and 	responses, 	the Board ORDERS 	that 	unfair 	practice
charge 	LA-CE-465 	filed 	by 	the 	Coast 	California Teachers
Association, 	CTA/NEA, 	against 	the Coast Community College
District 	is 	hereby DISMISSED.
Members 	Morgenstern 	and 	Jensen 	concurred.
29

The 	hearing officer 	found 	that 	the District's 	actions 	were
inherently 	destructive 	of 	employee 	rights 	but dismissed 	the
charge 	involving 	Maitland 	on 	the grounds 	that 	the District 	had
no 	recourse 	other 	than 	to cancel her 	class. 	However, 	he 	found
a 	violation as 	to 	the 	termination of 	Sandeen's 	services,
concluding 	that 	the District 	could 	have 	paid 	the 	full 	salaries
to 	full-time 	teachers 	whose 	classes 	were 	cancelled 	instead of
permitting 	them 	to 	exercise 	their 	bumping 	rights.
DISCUSSION
As we 	did 	in Case LA-CE-213, 	the Board 	dismisses 	the charge
in 	its 	entirety. 	CTA has produced 	no 	evidence 	that Maitland's
or 	Sandeen's participation 	in 	union 	activities was 	the
motivating factor 	in 	the District's 	actions. 	Further, 	there
can 	be 	no 	dispute 	that 	the 	District 	advanced 	legitimate
business 	justification 	for 	its 	actions with 	respect 	to both
teachers. 	As we pointed 	out 	in 	the 	companion case 	there 	is 	no
evidence of 	harm 	to employee 	rights 	nor 	has CTA demonstrated
that 	the 	District's 	actions 	had 	a chilling 	effect on 	the
teachers 	in general. 	While a 	union witness 	and Maitland both
claimed 	that 	numerous 	teachers 	were 	afraid 	to participate 	in
CTA activities 	because of 	expected District 	retaliation,
between 	them 	they 	could 	recall 	only 	one 	individual who was 	so
affected. 	Maitland 	testified 	that 	a member 	of 	the 	1977
organizing 	committee 	became 	inactive 	after 	the 	cancellations 	of
the 	classes 	and 	that 	the 	employee 	had 	informed 	her 	that 	she 	was
28