Labor Relations Update
Joshua Fox

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

NLRB Suspends Remedial Notice-Posting Requirements for Facilities Shutdown During COVID-19 Pandemic

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

NLRB: Unions Also Obligated To Provide Timely Relevant and Necessary Information Requested by Employers

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

NLRB Reaffirms Limitations on Employers’ Ability to Solicit Employee Assistance in Anti-Union Campaigning and Confidentiality Restrictions

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

Update: NLRB Delays Implementation of Final Election Rule Changes to July 31, 2020

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

NLRB Issues Final Rule Reworking Union Election Procedures

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

CARES ACT Relief for Mid-Size Businesses Comes with Important Union Related Conditions

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

NLRB General Counsel Issues Guidance on the Duty to Bargain During Emergencies

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

NLRB Decides to Assert Jurisdiction Over Charter Schools On A Case By Case Basis

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

NLRB Suspends Representation Elections through April 3, 2020 due to COVID-19 Pandemic

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

Employer’s Poll of Workforce Not Unlawful Mass Interrogation, NLRB Rules

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 Boeing Standard, NLRB Upholds Employer’s Policies Restricting Cell Phone Use, Non-Work Email Use and Disclosure of Confidential Information

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

NLRB Sues Oregon Seeking To Invalidate State Law Prohibiting “Captive Audience” Meetings

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

Congress Passes Labor-Friendly “PRO Act”

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

D.C. Circuit Vacates NLRB Decision, Reinforcing Board’s Limited Jurisdiction over Religious Schools

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

NLRB: Outsized Payment to Union Supporter to Waive Reinstatement in Board Settlement Not Unlawful Bribe

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

NLRB Gives End of Year Gift for Employers, Restores Longstanding Standard for Deferring to Arbitral Decisions

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

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

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

Busy Board Returns to Rule Permitting Workplace Confidentiality Restrictions during an Employer’s Investigation

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

NLRB Restores 50+ Year-Old Precedent: Employers (Once Again) May Unilaterally Stop Deducting Union Dues Upon Contract Expiration

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

Unpaid Interns are Not Statutory Employees, NLRB Concludes

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

No, Unions Do Not Have A Free Speech Right To Engage In Unlawful Secondary Boycott Activity, Federal Appeals Court Rules

On October 28, 2019, the Ninth Circuit, following in the footsteps of the D.C. Circuit and the Second Circuit, affirmed an order entered by the NLRB confirming that prohibitions on secondary boycotts under Section 8(b)(4)(i)(B) of the NLRA do not violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Nat’l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int’l … Continue Reading

Moment of Clarity? NLRB Upholds Info-Sharing and Media Contact Rules, Clarifies Boeing Standard Applicable to Employer Handbook Policies

The NLRB continues to issue decisions on a variety of interesting issues.  On October 10, the Board held, in LA Specialty Produce Co., 368 NLRB No. 93 (Oct. 10, 2019), that an employer’s strong confidentiality protections and limited media availability rules were lawful, and in so doing, clarified the analysis under the newly-issued Boeing standard, … Continue Reading

NLRB Dumps Longstanding “Clear and Unmistakable Waiver” Standard for More Employer-Friendly “Contract Coverage” Test

As we near the end of the agency’s fiscal year on September 30, the NLRB is churning out many significant decisions.  On September 10, the Board issued a sweeping decision concerning an issue that has divided the NLRB and D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (as well as the First and Seventh Circuits, and partially, the … Continue Reading

Board Affirms Right to Unilaterally Implement Changes to Benefit Plans Based on Waiver, Foreshadowing Potentially Looser Standard for Contractual Waivers

The NLRB continues to churn out decisions post-Labor Day.  On September 4, in a 2-1 decision,  (Chairman Ring and Member Kaplan, with Member McFerran dissenting), the NLRB found that  E.I. DuPont De Nemours did not violate the NLRA by unilaterally implementing changes to its company-wide retiree medical and dental plans based on the unions’ waiver … Continue Reading
LexBlog