Connecticut General Statutes|Sec. 31-105. Unfair labor practices.

                                                

Sec. 31-105. Unfair labor practices. It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer: (1) To spy upon or keep under surveillance, whether directly or through agents or any other person, any activities of employees or their representatives in the exercise of the rights set forth in section 31-104; (2) to prepare, maintain, distribute or circulate any blacklist of individuals for the purpose of preventing any of such individuals from obtaining or retaining employment because of the exercise by such individuals of any of the rights set forth in section 31-104; (3) to dominate or actually interfere with the formation, existence or administration of any employee organization or association, agency or plan which exists in whole or in part for the purpose of dealing with employers concerning terms or conditions of employment, labor disputes or grievances, or to contribute financial or other support to any such organization, by any means, including but not limited to the following: (A) By participating or assisting in, supervising, controlling or dominating (i) the initiation or creation of any such employee organization or association, agency or plan, or (ii) the meetings, management, operation, elections, formulation or amendment of the constitution, rules or policies of any such employee organization or association, agency or plan; (B) by urging the employees to join any such employee organization or association, agency or plan for the purpose of encouraging membership in the same; (C) by compensating any employee or individual for services performed on behalf of any such employee organization or association, agency or plan, or by donating free services, equipment, materials, office or meeting space or anything else of value for the use of any such employee organization or association, agency or plan, provided an employer shall not be prohibited from permitting employees to confer with him during working hours without loss of time or pay; (4) to require an employee or one seeking employment as a condition of employment to reveal membership, past membership or nonmembership in a labor organization, either by the use of written application forms, questionnaires or oral inquiries, or to join any company union or to refrain from forming or joining or assisting a labor organization of his own choosing; (5) to encourage membership in any company union or discourage membership in any labor organization by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure or in any term or condition of employment, provided nothing in this chapter shall preclude an employer from making an agreement with a labor organization requiring as a condition of employment membership therein, if such labor organization is the representative of employees as provided in section 31-106; (6) to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of employees, subject to the provisions of said section 31-106; (7) to refuse to discuss grievances with representatives of employees, subject to the provisions of said section 31-106; (8) to discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee because the employee has signed or filed any affidavit, petition or complaint or given any information or testimony under this chapter; (9) to distribute or circulate any blacklist of individuals exercising any right created or confirmed by this chapter or of members of labor organizations, or to inform any person of the exercise by any individual of such right, or of the membership of any individual in a labor organization for the purpose of preventing individuals so blacklisted or so named from obtaining or retaining employment; or (10) to do any acts other than those enumerated in this section which restrain, coerce or interfere with employees in the exercise of the rights set forth in section 31-104.


(1949 Rev., S. 7392; February, 1965, P.A. 256; P.A. 10-32, S. 102.)


See Sec. 31-51 re blacklisting.


Cited. 138 C. 277. Prohibits acts by employers which coerce employees in exercise of their right of self-organization. 139 C. 95. Cited. 142 C. 457. Layoff of complainants without subsequent recall held to be, in effect, a discharge because of their union activities. 148 C. 135. Cited. 149 C. 6. Institution of shop regulations as subterfuge to discharge employee is unfair labor practice. 150 C. 597. Dispatchers held not employees; thus taxi company not in violation of statute. 151 C. 573. Cited. 162 C. 579.


Cited. 14 CS 72. The hiring of men known not to be in favor of the union in order to destroy union's majority status held to be an unfair labor practice. 19 CS 280. Cited. 20 CS 11. Failure of union to properly represent an employee held an unfair labor practice under federal statute. Id., 438. Cited. 22 CS 138.


Although defendant was a union representative, employer did not violate section by refusing to discuss grievances with him because there was no claim by defendant nor finding of the court that he was the duly designated or selected representative of the employees as required. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 529.


Subdiv. (5):


Union shop clause expressly provided for. 180 C. 459.


Subdiv. (6):


An unfair labor practice under Subdiv. must be a failure to bargain with a union which in fact had been selected as bargaining agent for a unit. 147 C. 344. If collective bargaining agreement does not permit individual employee to seek arbitration personally, then employee must seek relief through bargaining agent. Id., 608. Cited. 175 C. 165. Refusal to bargain collectively with certified representatives of one's employees violates section. Id., 625. Cited. 232 C. 57.


Cited. 43 CS 340.


Subdiv. (10):


Picketing to compel employer to violate provision of Subdiv. is unlawful. 146 C. 93.


History: 1965 act amended Subdiv. (4) to specify that requiring employee or potential employee to reveal membership, past membership or nonmembership in a labor organization is an unfair practice; (Revisor's note: In 1991 the lower case alphabetic Subpara. indicators in Subdiv. (3) were replaced editorially by the Revisors with upper case alphabetic indicators); P.A. 10-32 made technical changes in Subdivs. (3) and (8), effective May 10, 2010.

View Latest Dockets

13 Files
Filed

Feb 23, 2022

Status

Non-Jury Verdict

Court

New London County

County

New London County, CT

Practice Area

Commercial

Matter Type

Breach of Contract

36 Files
Filed

Jul 25, 2014

Status

Dismissal

Court

New Haven County

County

New Haven County, CT

57 Files
Filed

May 16, 2017

Status

Dismissal

Judge

Hon. Cesar A. Noble Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Cesar A. Noble

Court

Hartford County

County

Hartford County, CT

Practice Area

Arbitration

Matter Type

General Arbitration

63 Files
Filed

Jan 22, 2014

Status

Trial Verdict

Judge

Hon. James J. Devine Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for James J. Devine

Court

Windham County

County

Windham County, CT

81 Files
Filed

Apr 27, 2015

Status

Trial Verdict

Judge

Hon. A. Susan Peck Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for A. Susan Peck

Court

Hartford County

County

Hartford County, CT

View More Dockets

View Latest Documents

preview-icon 9 pages

DOCKET NO. CV-17-6078460 : SUPERIOR COURT : : HARTFORD FEDERATION OF : JUDICIAL DISTRICT TEACHERS, LOCAL 1018 : OF HARTFORD …

County

Hartford County, CT

Filed Date

Apr 02, 2018

Judge Hon. Cesar A. Noble Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for Cesar A. Noble
preview-icon 2 pages

CONNECTICUT SMALL CLAIMS MATTER ANASTASIOU, JOCELYN : Civ. No. KNL-CV22-6055368S v. : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON NORWICH BOARD OF ED. ET AL. : AUGUST 4, 2022 OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR § 31-72 DAMAGES …

County

New London County, CT

Filed Date

Aug 04, 2022

preview-icon 13 pages

+ Juris No. 416477 DOCKET NO. WWM-CV14-6008110-S : SUPERIOR COURT JILLIAN L. HANLEY : LD. OF WINDHAM v. : ATPUTNAM XSE GROUP, INC., d/b/a : AZTEC OFFICE, LLC : JUNE 19, 2015 MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF C.G.S. § 31-72 DAMAGES The Defendant, XSE Group, Inc. d/b/a Aztec Office, LLC, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby move to preclude all evidence, or any reference thereto, pertaining to Plaintiff's alleged damages pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 31-72 …

County

Windham County, CT

Filed Date

Jun 19, 2015

Judge Hon. James J. Devine Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for James J. Devine
preview-icon 6 pages

STATE OF CONNECTICUT DOCKET NO: UWY-CV14-6025482-S : : : TCHAOU TCHABANGNA, MOUSTAFA : ADAM, VERNON SUTTON AND : …

County

New Haven County, CT

Filed Date

Jun 02, 2015

preview-icon 3 pages

GRIFFITH & KELLY, LLC —- ATTORNEYS AT LAW 66 CEDAR STREET, NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT 06111-2646 — 860.667.0855 — FAX 860.667.9260- JURIS NO. 100655 DOCKET NO.: HHD-CV-15-6058932-S : SUPERIOR COURT CHRISTINE CARROLL, Plaintiff ' : JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD VS. : AT HARTFORD NEWINGTON FINANCIAL, LLC D/B/A, JACKSON HEWITT and JEFFREY L. HEDBERG, Defendants : JUNE 10, 2019 POST-JUDGMENT/VERDICT MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS FROM PLAINTIFF INACCORDANCE WITH CONNECTICUT GENERAL STATUT…

County

Hartford County, CT

Filed Date

Jun 10, 2019

Judge Hon. A. Susan Peck Trellis Spinner 👉 Discover key insights by exploring more analytics for A. Susan Peck
View More Documents

Please wait a moment while we load this page.

New Envelope