id	author	title	date	pages	extension	mime	words	sentence	flesch	summary	cache	txt
cblr-1738	Levinson, Ariana R.	Solidarity on Social Media	2016	36	.pdf	application/pdf	13199	466	47	It is a violation of the Act for an employer to interfere with these Section 7 rights.16 Under long-standing precedent, employees act concertedly when two or more employees have a discussion or take action together.17 Under equally well-established precedent, an employee acts concertedly when the employee’s action results from prior collective action, when the employee acts alone but as a representative of other employees, and when an employee acts alone to initiate group action.18 Collective conduct is for mutual aid or protection when it concerns terms and conditions of employment.19 However, conduct that is found to be concerted action for mutual aid or protection can nonetheless lose protection under the Act if found to be egregious in nature. Contra Mushroom Transp., 330 F.2d at 684–85 (stating that where one employee advises another, who listens, with the motive only to advise as to what can individually be done to protect the other’s working status, then that is more likely “mere griping” and not preliminary discussions that might result in group action); Adelphi Inst., 287 N.L.R.B. at 1073 (finding that one employee who was placed on probation asking another employee if he had ever been placed on probation was not concerted activity because it was a “purely personal” inquiry); Daly Park Nursing Home, 287 N.L.R.B. at 710–11 (holding that speaking to co-workers about discharge of another employee not protected concerted activity because no “group action of any kind [was] intended, contemplated, or even referred to” (quoting Mushroom Transp., 330 F.2d at 685)); Asheville Sch., 347 N.L.R.B. at 881 (reasoning that employee who disclosed co-workers’ wage rates to other employees was engaged in mere griping).	cache/cblr-1738.pdf	txt/cblr-1738.txt