‘It wasn’t me, it was ChatGPT’ doesn’t fly as an NLRA violation defense

In case you were looking for another chatbot cautionary tale, the latest comes from a decision issued by an administrative law judge analyzing a company’s arguments in defense of a National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Section 7 charge.

Employer confesses, in writing, to unlawful motive for firing

The facts underlying the charge are simple enough. Daniela Melendez, an administrative assistant at a company called Autofit, disclosed her hourly wage to a curious coworker. Armed with that information, the coworker went to management and demanded equal pay. Just over two weeks later, Melendez was fired. When Melendez applied for unemployment benefits, the company had to submit a written explanation for her termination to the Texas Workforce Commission. Autofit’s explanation? Melendez had been “instructed to keep sensitive information confidential, yet she shared pay details with colleagues.” The problem with that, of course, is that firing an employee for talking about pay is unlawful. So the company had, in writing, admitted to breaking the law.