## Facts

- Sam McCullum was a wide receiver for the Seattle Seahawks of the National Football League.
- McCullum served as the Seahawks’ player representative to the National Football League Players Association (NFLPA), the players’ union.
- As player representative, McCullum engaged in protected union-related activity, including communicating with and acting for players on matters affecting terms and conditions of employment.
- Evidence showed friction between McCullum and team leadership connected to his union role and related conduct, including a preseason union solidarity gesture and public statements raising concerns about the club’s handling of player medical issues.
- McCullum testified that Seahawks personnel warned him about the “risk” of being the player representative.
- In September 1982, the Seahawks released (cut) McCullum from the team.
- McCullum and the NFLPA filed an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), alleging the release was motivated by hostility toward McCullum’s protected union activity.
- The Seahawks denied unlawful motive and asserted the release was a football decision made to improve the roster (including by obtaining other wide-receiver talent).

## Issues

1. Whether the Seahawks violated NLRA § 8(a)(3), and derivatively § 8(a)(1), by releasing Sam McCullum because of his protected activity as the NFLPA player representative.
2. Whether statements to McCullum about the “risk” of serving as player representative constituted unlawful interference with protected rights under NLRA § 8(a)(1).
3. What remedies were appropriate if McCullum’s release was unlawfully motivated.

## Decision

- The ALJ found the Seahawks released McCullum because of his protected union activity and union-representative role.
- The ALJ concluded the release constituted discrimination to discourage union activity, in violation of NLRA § 8(a)(3), and interfered with protected rights, in violation of NLRA § 8(a)(1).
- The ALJ rejected the Seahawks’ claim that it would have released McCullum for roster reasons absent the protected activity.
- The ALJ recommended standard Board relief, including cease-and-desist and notice remedies and make-whole relief (including reinstatement or equivalent relief and backpay with interest), consistent with NLRB practice.

## Legal Principles

- NLRA § 7 protects employees’ union membership and lawful union-representative activity, including acting for coworkers regarding working conditions.
- NLRA § 8(a)(3) is violated when an employer takes adverse action against an employee to discourage union membership or protected union activity; such discrimination also violates § 8(a)(1).
- Discriminatory-motive cases are evaluated under a motivating-factor and affirmative-defense framework: the General Counsel must show protected activity, employer knowledge, and that the activity was a motivating factor; the employer may avoid liability only by proving it would have taken the same action absent the protected activity.
- Employer statements that reasonably tend to deter employees from serving as union representatives or engaging in protected activity may constitute interference under NLRA § 8(a)(1).
- When an unlawful discharge is found, the NLRB’s usual remedy is make-whole relief designed to restore the employee to the position the employee would have held absent the unlawful conduct, along with notice posting.

## Conclusion

In Case No. 2-CA-19101, the ALJ concluded that the Seattle Seahawks’ September 1982 decision to release wide receiver Sam McCullum was motivated by hostility toward his protected conduct as the NFLPA player representative, constituting violations of NLRA §§ 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3), and recommended standard cease-and-desist, notice, and make-whole remedies.


In re Elmer Nordstrom, Managing Partner, et al., d/b/a Seattle Seahawks and the National Football League Players Association (Sam McCullum), Case No. 2-CA-19101 (1983)