There have been many precedent changing decisions coming from the NLRB in the last few years. Few of these changes were more hotly contested, or farther reaching, than the Board’s decision in Browning-Ferris where it altered its longstanding joint employer test. The new joint-employer test made it much more likely for a joint-employer relationship to be found to exist. The decision … Continue Reading
As we have noted at times, the human element in labor relations makes for interesting situations. One of the more interesting issues is the timeliness of representation petitions, which, despite the existence of clear rules, can still be disrupted by human action. A union, an employee or an employer can all file a representation petition with … Continue Reading
Since December 2017, when the Board issued a number of decisions which restored precedent that had been changed in the last few years, (discussed here, here, here, and here), not much of note has been happening at the Board. Indeed, there was not a full complement at the Board until April when Chairman Ring was confirmed. Two upcoming events may see … Continue Reading
The Board is now operating at a full complement and is issuing decisions on a fairly regular basis. Nothing earth shattering in terms of law (which is kind of a relief) but there are some interesting issues worth discussing. A frequent topic of discussion here is the often blurry line between what constitutes “protected” versus … Continue Reading
As we have noted previously, the make-up of the Board currently stands at four out of five total members, divided evenly between two warring factions making it pretty much impossible to change the law which requires a majority. It also means the precedent the new General Counsel has highlighted will not be reviewed until a … Continue Reading
December saw a flurry of decisions (discussed here, here, here and here) by the NLRB as it briefly held a full complement. The Board currently has only four members and so law-changing decisions are less likely to occur until a new member is confirmed. Board cases still proceed through the courts. Sometimes, as we have seen here and here, a federal … Continue Reading
On the eve of Chairman Miscimarra’s departure, the Board has been churning out decision after decision, many of them reversing precedents from the last 8 years. Today, the NLRB, in Raytheon Network Centric Systems, 365 NLRB No. 161 (December 15, 2017), returned to the longstanding law of the NLRB that there is no duty to … Continue Reading
When bargaining over an agreement, it is common to hear union representatives ask “why do we need such elaborate language in an agreement? We are always reasonable.” To which, the company usually responds, “We think you’re nifty but the next person holding your job may not be as reasonable; better to have it in writing … Continue Reading
When an employer and a union sit down to bargain they often agree to ground rules for how negotiations are to be conducted. A common ground rule, for example, is for the parties to agree to address “non-economic” items before addressing economic proposals. Other ground rules include things like confidentiality of negotiations (becoming increasingly rare as unions want to take their … Continue Reading
A significant change in NLRB precedent during the last few years was the added requirement that an employer bargain over discretionary aspects of discipline in the period between the union acquiring representational rights and the first contract. Given the limited set of circumstances one doesn’t see a whole lot of these cases. A recent NLRB … Continue Reading
During the last several years, the NLRB has overturned a great deal of existing precedent. Among other changes, the Board has required bargaining over discipline in newly organized units, found graduate students to be employees entitled to organize, and found that two employers may have to bargain together. The Board also changed the longstanding rule … Continue Reading
The NLRB recently issued a rare decision completely dismissing all allegations against an employer; rarer still because it was unanimous. In Brooke Glen Behavioral Hospital, 365 NLRB No. 79 (May 15, 2017) the NLRB was confronted with a situation where an employee-union adherent engaged in behavior ultimately found to be inappropriate and unprotected. The employer, a … Continue Reading
What would the holiday season be without a Christmas gift case? A perennial problem for labor relations personnel is whether the yearly Christmas turkey given to employees is something that an employer must bargain over before (bah humbug) discontinuing. See, e.g., Q-1 Motor Express, Inc., 323 NLRB 767, 775 (1997). In a decision issued shortly … Continue Reading
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit joined the Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits in upholding the Board’s Specialty Healthcare standard for determining appropriate bargaining units under the National Labor Relations Act, although with a very skeptical eye on how it applied. Constellation Brands, U.S. Operations, Inc. v. NLRB, … Continue Reading
In another example of the inconsistency of the current state of Board law, a 2-1 majority of the NLRB ruled that an employer not only had a management right but it wasn’t necessary that this right be expressly set forth in the parties’ contract. This is certainly odd because the NLRB went out of its … Continue Reading
The end of another NLRB fiscal year is upon us. Today, September 30, marks the last date of the fiscal year. We can expect to see a number of decisions issue from the Board, and many determinations made at the regional level, as the agency attempts to pump up its case processing statistics. We will … Continue Reading
The first day of employment is often chaotic. New employees must learn their way around the jobsite, meet (and remember the names of) many new people and otherwise familiarize themselves with working at a new job. Oh, and there’s the paperwork. Seemingly endless mounds of paperwork. New employees are asked to sign a multitude of documents … Continue Reading
So far, it has been a long quiet Summer with little NLRB activity, – with the exception of the recent ruling that temporary agency employees can be part of a bargaining unit with the principal employer’s employees, of course. More change may be coming, though. The end of the NLRB’s fiscal year is September 30 and … Continue Reading
Collective bargaining agreements, do not, and cannot cover every issue that will arise during their term. Matters concerning terms and conditions of employment that are not addressed in the labor contract have to be negotiated before changes can be made. Sometimes, however, the parties agree that management can make changes to certain terms and conditions of … Continue Reading
The NLRB has been active but quiet during the last few months as the agency quietly reaffirms decisions nullified by the Supreme Court. By all accounts, however, and as history has proved, the NLRB is getting ready to issue an onslaught of law-changing decisions as we head into the holiday season. This onslaught of change … Continue Reading
The Ebola panic presently sweeping the U.S. raises a host of potential issues for employers. We recently provided guidance to help employers ensure employee safety while also complying with legal obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar laws. In addition, the Occupational Health & Safety Administration (OSHA) recently released a comprehensive summary of … Continue Reading
The National Labor Relations Board, with one member dissenting, has issued a decision in which it “refines” the test it uses for determining whether it will find individuals performing services for an employer to be employees, who are covered by the National Labor Relations Act, or independent contractors, who are not. The case is FedEx … Continue Reading
This week the NLRB decided two cases involving union organizing in large department stores. In each case an NLRB regional director applied the Board’s Specialty Healthcare test to determine whether the bargaining unit requested by the union was appropriate. In Specialty Healthcare, the Board held that a unit will be presumptively appropriate for collective bargaining … Continue Reading
In a rare 9-0 decision issued today, the United States Supreme Court invalidated the recess appointments President Obama made to the NLRB on January 4, 2012, while the Senate was in a three day recess. The decision in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning (USSC June 26, 2014) means that the NLRB was operating without the requisite … Continue Reading
