Joshua Fox
Associate
Joshua S. Fox is an associate in the Labor & Employment Law Department and a member of the Sports, Labor-Management Relations, Class and Collective Actions and Wage and Hour Groups.
As a member of the Sports Law Group, Josh has represented several Major League Baseball Clubs in all aspects of the salary arbitration process, including the Kansas City Royals, San Francisco Giants, Tampa Bay Rays and Toronto Blue Jays. In particular, Josh assisted with the successful representation of the Toronto Blue Jays in their case against All-Star Josh Donaldson, which was the largest club victory in salary arbitration in recent years. Josh also represents Major League Baseball and its clubs in ongoing litigation brought by current and former minor league players who allege minimum wage and overtime violations, as well as similar claims brought on behalf of scouts. Josh participated on the team that successfully defended Major League Baseball in a wage-and-hour lawsuit brought by a former volunteer for the 2013 All-Star FanFest, who alleged minimum wage violations under federal and state law. The lawsuit was dismissed by the federal district court, and was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Subscribe to all posts by Joshua Fox
In December 2019, the NLRB announced its Final Rule governing representation case procedures. The Final Rule applies to petitions filed on or after May 31, 2020. With the effective date fast approaching, NLRB Regions nationwide are holding public information sessions to explain these changes. Recently, on May 21, 2020, Region 25 in Indianapolis hosted its … Continue Reading
As we discussed here, the National Labor Relations Board decided early this month that it would temporarily suspend the remedial notice-posting and emailing requirement at facilities shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic until after reopening and a return of a “substantial complement” of employees. See Danbury Ambulance Service, Inc., 369 NLRB 68 (2020). The … Continue Reading
As many states throughout the country have begun implementing phased reopening plans, so too has the NLRB begun to return to a semblance of normality. Representation elections resumed in early April, and the NLRB recently provided clarification as to how representation hearings should be conducted. In the last few weeks the agency has counted ballots … Continue Reading
As most of the country’s workforce continues to adjust to the new realities of social distancing, stay-at-home orders, and limited travel, the practice of law and the forums for adjudicating disputes have shifted to video and telephonic hearings to ensure that the wheels of justice continue to turn notwithstanding COVID-19. The NLRB has been no … Continue Reading
The Board continues to issue decisions amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, while acknowledging that business operations around the country are far from “business as usual.” The agency is up and running. Representation elections vote counts are being conducted via video conference as are hearings. The remedy stage of unfair labor practice proceedings also has caught up … Continue Reading
We have often reported about how an employer’s failure to adequately respond to an information request made by a union can lead to unfair labor practice charges and litigation. Sometimes a union makes an information request for strategic reasons, not for any representational reason. Sometimes, an employer’s response can lead to further complications. The same … Continue Reading
In maintaining business as usual as best it can amidst the ongoing COVID-19 crisis, the Board recently decided an issue concerning limitations on employer campaign tactics, and an employer’s limits in restricting discussions with employees related to terms and conditions of employment. In First American Enterprises d/b/a Heritage Lakeside, 369 NLRB No. 54 (2020), the … Continue Reading
As we reported here, on April 1, 2020, the NLRB published its final rule making three amendments to its rules and regulations governing union elections (relating to the Board’s blocking charge policy; timing and notice requirements attendant to voluntary recognition; and 9(a) recognition in the construction industry). The rule was expected to be effective as … Continue Reading
Although, like everyone else, the personnel at the NLRB have been consumed with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on daily operations, including the ability of its Regional Offices to function and serve the public, the Board nevertheless continues moving forward on non-COVID-19 matters as well. On March 31, 2020, the NLRB announced it had … Continue Reading
Mid-sized businesses (defined as 500 to 10,000 employees) impacted by the Coronavirus may be able to obtain relief loans under the COVID-19 stimulus law, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), but only if non-union employers agree not to oppose the unionization of their workforce for the term of the loan, and … Continue Reading
On March 27, 2020, NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb issued Memorandum GC-20-04 to provide guidance to NLRB regional offices and the general public. Acknowledging that “we are [currently] in an unprecedented situation,” the General Counsel provided summaries of several NLRB decisions discussing how, if at all, an employer’s duty to bargain under NLRA Section 8(d) … Continue Reading
The NLRB continues to operate during the novel coronavirus crisis. Regional offices are largely working remotely as is the rest of the country. The Board itself continues to issue decisions, albeit at a slower pace than usual. On February 4, 2019, the NLRB invited interested parties to file briefs addressing whether the agency should decline … Continue Reading
The NLRB announced today in a press release that “[d]ue to the extraordinary circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic,” all representation elections, including mail ballot elections, will be suspended for the next two weeks, through and including April 3, 2020. This means that any representation elections previously scheduled from now through April 3, 2020 will … Continue Reading
When it comes to an unfair practice allegation asserting an employer’s statement is unlawful, words matter. And, so does context. Under NLRB case law, the actual employer statements are evaluated as well as the overall context the words were uttered to determine whether there exists coercion. Recently, the NLRB addressed an unusual case where an … Continue Reading
Applying the facially neutral work rule test laid out in Boeing (see here), the Board recently reversed an Administrative Law Judge decision, concluding that the employer maintained lawful workplace rules restricting employee use of (i) cell phones in commercial vehicles, (ii) the company email server for purposes not related to work, and (iii) the disclosure … Continue Reading
On February 7, 2020 the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) sued the State of Oregon in federal court seeking a declaratory judgement to invalidate a state statute that protects employees who refuse to attend lawful compulsory meetings held by employers during organizing campaigns from adverse employment action. These meetings, pejoratively referred to as “captive audience” … Continue Reading
On Thursday, February 6, 2020 the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, also known as the “PRO Act”. The legislation (which can be viewed here), passed mostly along party lines, would provide sweeping changes to the NLRA that would enhance greatly the ability of unions to organize employees and … Continue Reading
Similar to other disagreements between the NLRB and D.C. Circuit (see here for a recent example ), a tension developed during the last several years regarding the appropriate standard to determine whether teachers at religious schools are covered by the NLRA and within the Board’s jurisdiction, or whether the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment … Continue Reading
Shamrock Foods Company, 369 N.L.R.B. No. 5 (January 7, 2020) is the latest in the National Labor Relations Board’s series of employer-friendly decisions. In Shamrock Foods, the Board held that an employer did not violate Sections 8(a)(3) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act by offering and entering into a settlement agreement with an … Continue Reading
In yet another end-of-2019 decision overruling significant NLRA precedent, the Board reverted to the less stringent Spielberg / Olin standard for determining whether to defer to arbitration decisions in the context of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) unfair labor practice cases. See United Parcel Service, Inc., 369 NLRB 1 (2019). The Board issued this decision unanimously, … Continue Reading
The Board continues churning out precedent-setting decisions as year-end approaches. Two days before the Christmas holiday, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 368 NLRB No. 146 (Dec. 16, 2019), the NLRB applied its new view on handbook rules—the Boeing test—to Wal-Mart’s policy that employees can only wear “small, non-distracting” union insignia in the workplace, holding that the … Continue Reading
As anticipated, in one of the last decisions before the end of Member McFerran’s term, the NLRB issued another important opinion. Reverting back to precedent that preceded a 2015 decision, the Board, in Apogee Retail LLC d/b/a Unique Thrift Store, 368 NLRB No. 144 (2019), held that an employer’s confidentiality restrictions for information relating to … Continue Reading
Mid-December is always a time where one can expect significant decisions to issue from the NLRB. In recent years, we saw the Board, among other decisions, abandon the much criticized “micro unit” standard and the equally criticized handbook violation standard. December is also one of the main times of year that a Board Member’s term … Continue Reading
The National Labor Relations Board recently held that a group of employees who were advocating on behalf of unpaid interns were not engaged in protected activity because the interns were not “employees” as that term is defined in Section 2(3) of the National Labor Relations Act. In so doing, the Board reaffirmed its longstanding precedent … Continue Reading
NLRB Regions Hold Information Sessions to Discuss Representation Case Changes
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Heylee Bernstein on Posted in NLRB Election Rules
Update: NLRB Extends Suspension of Notice-Posting Requirements to Cases Involving Informal Settlement Agreements
By Peter D. Conrad, Joshua Fox and Alex Downie on Posted in COVID-19, NLRA, NLRB
BREAKING: NLRB to Resume Unfair Labor Practice Trials June 1, 2020
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Alex Downie on Posted in COVID-19, NLRA, NLRB
NLRB: Hearings in Representation Cases with Witnesses Must Be Conducted By Videoconference during COVID-19 Pandemic
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Thomas B. Fiascone on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, NLRB Election Rules, Representation Elections
NLRB Suspends Remedial Notice-Posting Requirements for Facilities Shutdown During COVID-19 Pandemic
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Scott Tan on Posted in NLRA, NLRB
NLRB: Unions Also Obligated To Provide Timely Relevant and Necessary Information Requested by Employers
NLRB Reaffirms Limitations on Employers’ Ability to Solicit Employee Assistance in Anti-Union Campaigning and Confidentiality Restrictions
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Elizabeth Dailey on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Section 8(a)(1)
Update: NLRB Delays Implementation of Final Election Rule Changes to July 31, 2020
By Mark Theodore and Joshua Fox on Posted in COVID-19, NLRA, NLRB
NLRB Issues Final Rule Reworking Union Election Procedures
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Scott Tan on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Rulemaking
CARES ACT Relief for Mid-Size Businesses Comes with Important Union Related Conditions
By Joseph Baumgarten, Michael Lebowich, Joshua Fox and Dominique Kilmartin on Posted in COVID-19, NLRA, NLRB Election Rules
NLRB General Counsel Issues Guidance on the Duty to Bargain During Emergencies
NLRB Decides to Assert Jurisdiction Over Charter Schools On A Case By Case Basis
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Samantha Shear on Posted in NLRA, NLRB
NLRB Suspends Representation Elections through April 3, 2020 due to COVID-19 Pandemic
By Michael Lebowich and Joshua Fox on Posted in Coronavirus, NLRA, NLRB, Representation Elections
Employer’s Poll of Workforce Not Unlawful Mass Interrogation, NLRB Rules
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Thomas B. Fiascone on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Protected activity, Section 7, Section 8(a)(1)
Applying the Boeing Standard, NLRB Upholds Employer’s Policies Restricting Cell Phone Use, Non-Work Email Use and Disclosure of Confidential Information
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Rachel Therese Gulotta on Posted in Confidentiality, Handbook, NLRA, NLRB, Section 7
NLRB Sues Oregon Seeking To Invalidate State Law Prohibiting “Captive Audience” Meetings
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Jordan Simon on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, NLRB Election Rules, Preemption
Congress Passes Labor-Friendly “PRO Act”
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Jordan Simon on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Protected activity, Section 7
D.C. Circuit Vacates NLRB Decision, Reinforcing Board’s Limited Jurisdiction over Religious Schools
By Mark Theodore and Joshua Fox on Posted in Collective Bargaining, NLRA, NLRB, Section 8(a)(5)
NLRB: Outsized Payment to Union Supporter to Waive Reinstatement in Board Settlement Not Unlawful Bribe
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Scott Tan on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Section 8(a)(3)
NLRB Gives End of Year Gift for Employers, Restores Longstanding Standard for Deferring to Arbitral Decisions
Buttoning Up Rules on Union Insignia – Board Makes It Easier for Employers to Restrict Size and Scope of Union Buttons For Those With Customer Contact Work
By Michael Lebowich, Joshua Fox and Abigail Rosenblum on Posted in Buttons, NLRA, NLRB, Section 7, Section 8(a)(1)
Busy Board Returns to Rule Permitting Workplace Confidentiality Restrictions during an Employer’s Investigation
NLRB Restores 50+ Year-Old Precedent: Employers (Once Again) May Unilaterally Stop Deducting Union Dues Upon Contract Expiration
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Jacob P. Tucker on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Section 8(a)(1), Section 8(a)(3)
Unpaid Interns are Not Statutory Employees, NLRB Concludes
By Mark Theodore, Joshua Fox and Samantha Shear on Posted in NLRA, NLRB, Protected activity, Section 7, Section 8(a)(1)
