MSEA on behalf of Thomas Heels v. State Development Office, State of Maine and MLRB CV-84-309, affirming No. 84-21, aff'd MSEA et al. v. State Development Office, 499 A.2d 165 (Me. 1985). STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, ss. CIVIL ACTION Docket No. CV-84-309 MAINE STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION, on behalf of THOMAS HEELS, Plaintiffs vs. ORDER STATE DEVELOPMENT OFFICE and STATE OF MAINE and MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Defendants This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' appeal from a decision of the Maine Labor Relations Board. That decision held that the State Development Office did not interfere with, restrain, or coerce Thomas Heels in exercising rights pursuant to the State Employees Labors Relations Act or otherwise discriminate against him in his employment in ways which would have been violative of 26 M.R.S.A. 979-C-1-A or B. A review of the transcript of the proceedings before the Maine Labor Relations Board indicates that there may be sufficient evidence in the record to support the result sought by the -1- 2 Plaintiffs. However, the Court also determines that there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the findings reached by the Maine Labor Relations Board. It is up to the factfinder, not this Court, to resolve conflicting interpretations of evidence. Considering the interpretation based on federal law and federal precedent utilized by the Board, the Court determines that the conclusions of law reached by the Board, based on its findings, are not inconsistent with the present state of the law. In order to support a decision that the Maine Labor Relations Board erroneously applied the law, the Plaintiff would have to establish that the law mandates conclusions adverse to the State Development Office as a result of the evident coincidences in the record between disciplinary actions or adverse ratings and times when the employee sought reclassifications, salary improvements, or engaged in union activity. Without a law mandating such adverse inferences, the findings of the Board are not clearly erroneous, and those findings having been made, the Court determines that the Board properly applied the law. Therefore, the Court ORDERS and the entry shall be: 1. Appeal DENIED. 2. Decision of the Maine Labor Relations Board is AFFIRMED. Dated: February 25, 1985 _______________________________________ DONALD G. ALEXANDER Justice, Superior Court