[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 29, Volume 9]
[Revised as of July 1, 2005]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 29CFR1977.6]

[Page 193]
 
                             TITLE 29--LABOR
 
CHAPTER XVII--OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT 
                          OF LABOR (CONTINUED)
 
PART 1977_DISCRIMINATION AGAINST EM PLOY EES EX ER CIS ING RIGHTS 
 
Sec. 1977.6  Unprotected activities distinguished.

    (a) Actions taken by an employer, or others, which adversely affect 
an employee may be predicated upon nondiscriminatory grounds. The 
proscriptions of section 11(c) apply when the adverse action occurs 
because the employee has engaged in protected activities. An employee's 
engagement in activities protected by the Act does not automatically 
render him immune from discharge or discipline for legitimate reasons, 
or from adverse action dictated by non-prohibited considerations. See, 
NLRB v. Dixie Motor Coach Corp., 128 F. 2d 201 (5th Cir., 1942).
    (b) At the same time, to establish a violation of section 11(c), the 
employee's engagement in protected activity need not be the sole 
consideration behind discharge or other adverse action. If protected 
activity was a substantial reason for the action, or if the discharge or 
other adverse action would not have taken place ``but for'' engagement 
in protected activity, section 11(c) has been violated. See, Mitchell v. 
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 278 F. 2d 562 (8th Cir., 1960); Goldberg v. 
Bama Manufacturing, 302 F. 2d 152 (5th Cir., 1962). Ultimately, the 
issue as to whether a discharge was because of protected activity will 
have to be determined on the basis of the facts in the particular case.

                          Specific Protections