#NLRB

Subscribe to #NLRB via RSS

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) made the inevitable official when it recently held that employee attendance at employer-mandated meetings where employers express their views on potential unionization– often referred to as “captive-audience meetings” – violate the National Labor Relations Act. The decision overturns a 1948 Board decision and renders unlawful conduct that had been deemed lawful by the Board for more than 75 years.Continue Reading The NLRB Overturns Decades-Old Precedent by Banning Captive-Audience Meetings

As we noted in Part I of this special two-part blog, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo issued an important policy memorandum last month. In GC Memorandum 25-01, Abruzzo attacked as unlawful both “stay-or-pay” provisions (where workers agree to repay their employer for certain benefits if the employee prematurely leaves employment) and non-compete agreements. Part I covered the remedies proposed by the GC for employees subject to non-compete provisions found unlawful by the Board. Here, Part II addresses stay-or-pay provisions, the GC’s legal position that such provisions are presumptively unlawful, and the remedies she will seek for employees subject to stay-or-pay provisions.Continue Reading NLRB GC to Seek Broad Remedies for Non-Compete and Stay-or-Pay Provisions – Part II

With less than three months until the 2024 presidential election, the United Auto Workers (UAW) union filed unfair labor practice charges against the campaign of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump – which, of course, employs workers – and Tesla, Elon Musk’s automotive company. The charges stem from statements made during Musk’s Monday interview of Trump on Musk’s social media platform, X (nee Twitter).Continue Reading No, You Can’t Fire Employees for Threatening to Strike!

On November 2, 2023, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo provided guidance to inquiries received by the NLRB in the wake of the Board’s decision in Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC (which we wrote about here). In summary, the Board’s decision in Cemex established a new standard for the steps to be taken by an employer that receives a union’s demand for recognition, and the consequences facing an employer that violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) after receiving a demand for recognition – specifically, the likelihood that the Board will order the employer to bargain with the union, even if the employer did not extend voluntary recognition to the union and the union did not prevail in a NLRB-administered election.Continue Reading NLRB GC Issues Guidance Regarding Board Decision Impacting Employer Responses to Demands for Voluntary Recognition

Today, October 26, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board issued a final rule that rescinds and replaces the Trump Administration’s 2020 rule establishing the current test for determining whether two entities are joint employers. This new rule will result in more findings that two entities are joint employers. Under federal labor law, a joint employer is required to bargain with a union selected by its jointly-employed workers and may be held liable for the unfair labor practices committed by the other employer.Continue Reading NLRB Returns to a More Expansive Joint Employer Standard

Many companies blissfully believe that they don’t have to worry about the National Labor Relations Act or its enforcing agency, the National Labor Relations Board, as long as they don’t have a union and no one is currently trying to unionize them. They’re wrong. Terribly wrong. Horribly, astoundingly, insanely wrong. And ignoring an order from the Board can have serious consequences – including being taken into custody by U.S. Marshals, as the Board made very clear in a recent press release!Continue Reading Refusing to Comply with an NLRB Order Can Land Employers in Handcuffs (Even If You’re Not Unionized)

As most of us know, Hollywood is striking (or more specifically, the members of the writers’ and actors’ unions). Some of you may have seen media reports, like this CNN article, about the unions filing unfair labor practice (ULP) charges with the National Labor Relations Board over unsafe picketing conditions. Which may cause some of you to wonder – what is an employer’s responsibility with respect to those conditions? Continue Reading Are Employers Supposed to Protect Striking Employees?

As has been widely reported, including in our February E-Update, the National Labor Relations Board recently asserted that severance agreements may not contain general non-disparagement or confidentiality/non-disclosure clauses, based on its premise that such clauses violate the rights of employees under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act to engage in concerted activity for their mutual aid or protection (i.e. “protected concerted activity”). This ruling was troubling for unionized and non-union employers alike. General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo has now issued a memo expressing her views regarding the practical impact of this ruling. Continue Reading NLRB General Counsel Provides (Some) Clarification on Severance Agreement Non-Disparagement and Confidentiality Provisions

A Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board found merit to an unfair labor practice charge alleging that the University of Southern California (USC) misclassified football and basketball players as student-athletes rather than employees and maintained unlawful work rules. In addition, the Complaint will allege the Pac-12 Conference and the NCAA are joint employers of the USC athletes. The charge was filed on behalf of the athletes by the National College Players Association, a college athlete advocacy group.
Continue Reading Are College Athletes “Employees” Under Federal Labor Law? We Are About to Find Out…