Total Articles: 156
Jackson Lewis P.C. • April 19, 2016
Republicans in the House of Representatives have introduced a joint resolution (H.J. Res. 87) expressing congressional disapproval and seeking to block implementation of the United States Department of Labor’s controversial Final Rule relating to “persuader” activity under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA). The Rule is set to become effective on April 25, 2016.
Carothers DiSante & Freudenberger LLP • March 30, 2016
Yesterday, the Department of Labor's controversial "Persuader Rule" was published in the Federal Register and will require employers, beginning July 1, 2016, to make disclosures to the DOL regarding consultants and attorneys they hire to assist them in persuading employees regarding representational (union organizing) and collective bargaining matters. Previously, such disclosures were required only if the consultant had direct contact with the employees, but not if the consultant merely gave advice and assistance to the employer on how to communicate with employees.
On March 24, the US Department of Labor (DOL) published a controversial and long-awaited final rule under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) that expands an employer's obligation to report persuader activity - activity engaged in to directly or indirectly persuade employees concerning their rights to organize and collectively bargain.
Ogletree Deakins • March 09, 2016
Recently, 106 labor law professors and labor studies academics filed a rulemaking petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) seeking an administrative rule that would require employers to provide “equal time” to union organizers to campaign on employer-controlled premises at the employer’s cost. This “equal time” requirement would be imposed if an employer conducted meetings at any time after the employer first became aware of a union organizing campaign or had a sense that such a campaign was likely to be launched.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • February 19, 2016
The NLRB continues to scrutinize closely cases presenting issues of supervisory status. In Veolia Transportation Services, Inc., 363 NLRB No. 98 (slip op. January 20, 2016), an NLRB panel voted 2 to 1 to overturn a Regional Director’s decision that a transportation company’s road supervisors possessed the authority to discipline and reward employees and therefore were supervisors within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the NLRA.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • January 21, 2016
On January 13, 2016, the National Labor Relations Board issued a call for interested parties to file briefs addressing the Board’s current standard on whether graduate student assistants are “employees” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Jackson Lewis P.C. • January 21, 2016
A group of 106 university and law school professors of labor law and employment relations has petitioned the National Labor Relations Board to issue a rule amending its long-held position regarding “captive audience” meetings held by employers in connection with NLRB-conducted union elections. The petition, filed on January 15, 2016, requires “equal time” for unions, if requested; if the union is not given equal time, an employer’s election victory will be overturned and a new election conducted.
Ogletree Deakins • November 18, 2015
Since the new “ambush” election rules went into effect on April 14, 2015, there have been over 1,000 petitions for elections filed with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Approximately 60 of those petitions have led to pre-election representation-(R-case) hearings to determine unit issues. I participated in one of those 60 or so cases earlier this month and had the opportunity to glean insights on how the new procedures impact employers.
Ogletree Deakins • November 10, 2015
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has made union organizing by email and social media a reality. The NLRB’s General Counsel issued Memorandum 15-08 on September 1, 2015, stating that, “[e]ffective immediately, parties may submit electronic signatures in support of a showing of interest.” On October 26, 2015, the General Counsel issued Revised Memorandum 15-08 providing more detail and examples of how the new process will work. Employers should expect unions to take advantage of this groundbreaking development by using email and social media to expedite and expand the organizing process.
Franczek Radelet P.C • October 28, 2015
In what some are characterizing as a final effort to shape the landscape of unionization at private colleges and universities during the Obama administration, the NLRB granted the United Auto Workers’ request to review an NLRB’s Regional Director's two-time dismissal of the union’s petition seeking to organize graduate students at The New School in New York City. The decision has generated discussion around the broader topic of whether the NLRB will use the review of The New School case to reverse its position on unionization at private colleges and universities
Fisher & Phillips LLP • September 01, 2015
Unless you’ve been hibernating, hiding under a rock, or vacationing in a location without Wi-Fi reception, you may have noticed that the last several months have been kinder to labor unions than any in recent memory. Changes in labor laws have provided an opening for labor unions to reassert their relevance in the American workplace after decades of decline.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • August 20, 2015
A unanimous decision on Monday by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ended the Northwestern University scholarship football players’ bid to unionize — without addressing the key issue that has plagued collegiate athletics for so many years: whether college athletes are employees and entitled to the rights as such under federal law.
Franczek Radelet P.C • August 19, 2015
Yesterday, in a highly anticipated decision, the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) declined to exercise jurisdiction over the College Athletes Players Association’s (CAPA) representation petition. CAPA asked the Board to find that scholarship football players at Northwestern University are employees within the meaning of Section 2(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (the Act), thereby opening the door to unionization. Although the Board chose not to determine whether grant-in-aid scholarship football players at Northwestern are “employees” under the Act—even noting that the question does not have an “obvious answer”—the Board found that asserting jurisdiction in the case would not promote the purposes of the Act.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • August 19, 2015
The National Labor Relations Board continues the string of controversial moves in its unfair labor practice cases against McDonald’s. In December 2014, the NLRB’s General Counsel filed thirteen complaints naming the franchisor, McDonald’s USA, as a joint employer for alleged unfair labor practices of various local franchisees. On August 14, 2015, the Board issued a decision affirming an Administrative Law Judge’s decision denying McDonald’s USA, LLC’s motion for a bill of particulars.1 A bill of particulars would have required the General Counsel to specify the particular facts and law that support its theory of joint employer liability.
XpertHR • August 19, 2015
In a case that sparked nationwide debate, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has declined jurisdiction and, therefore, dismissed an attempt by Northwestern University football players to unionize. The players claimed they are university employees and should be allowed to form a union and collectively bargain.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 18, 2015
Earlier today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) unanimously decided that college football players at Northwestern University cannot comprise an appropriate bargaining unit, squelching their attempt to form the first-ever union comprised of collegiate athletes. The decision by the five-member panel puts to bed this organizing effort – for now.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 15, 2015
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has ruled that AT&T had a right to forbid employees, when interacting with the public, from wearing t-shirts that the company reasonably believed could harm its relationship with customers or its public image. In Southern New England Telephone Company v. National Labor Relations Board, Nos. 11-1099 and 11-1143 (D.C. Cir. July 10, 2015), the court vacated and refused to enforce a decision by the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) that found the company’s actions unlawful.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • June 10, 2015
Under current National Labor Relations Board rules, a union can organize a bargaining unit of temporary employees, and the user employer’s solely employed regular employees, only if both employers consent. However, the Board is primed to change this rule in Miller & Anderson, Inc.1 On May 18, 2015, the NLRB granted review of a Regional Director’s 2012 decision to dismiss a union election petition. By granting review of the Regional Director’s decision, the Board appears to be on the verge of including jointly employed temporary employees in a single unit with employees solely employed by one of the joint employers.
FordHarrison LLP • May 08, 2015
Executive Summary: In a case handled by FordHarrison attorneys, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel recently held that an employer was not required to provide information regarding the non-bargaining unit employees of a separate subsidiary to the union representing its employees. Dismissing unfair labor practice charges filed against the employer, the General Counsel held that the union failed to present objective evidence that the two subsidiaries were acting as a single employer; accordingly it was not entitled to information on the non-bargaining unit employees. See ABM Indus., Inc., NLRB Div. of Advice, No. 18-CA-136876 and 19-CA-124390, April 8, 2015, (released April 22, 2015).
Fisher & Phillips LLP • January 21, 2015
Employers working for foreign-based automotive manufacturers in the 13 right-to-work states throughout the South should consider preparing for what may become a protracted battle over industry unionization. Volkswagen AG may have unwittingly shifted the paradigm last November when it became the first foreign-based automotive manufacturer to open its doors (in a manner of speaking) to organized labor at a domestic plant that is not jointly owned by an American-based manufacturer. A new policy at Volkswagen’s Chattanooga, Tennessee, plant — entitled the Community Organization Engagement policy — allows labor organizations to be involved in employee-related discussions if it can be established by an outside auditor that the labor organization has enrolled at least 15 percent of the plant’s workers in a relevant employee group.
Shaw Valenza LLP • January 12, 2015
In 2007, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided in Register Guard that employers could limit employee use of company email systems to business purposes so long as the limitation was applied consistently to all non-business communications. In other words, the policy could not be focused solely on prohibiting “protected concerted activity,” such as union organizing, or discussing hours, wages, and other terms and conditions of employment.
Phelps Dunbar LLP • December 30, 2014
In a divided opinion issued on December 11, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board decided that employees who have been given access to their employer’s email system in the course of their work are entitled to use the system on nonworking time to engage in statutorily protected discussions about their terms and conditions of employment. Purple Communications, Inc., 361 NLRB 126 (2014). In so doing, the NLRB overruled its divided 2007 decision, Register Guard, 351 NLRB 1110 (2007), to the extent that it held that employees had no statutory right to use their employer’s email system for Section 7 purposes.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 24, 2014
Last week, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) revised its standard for determining when faculty members can unionize. Although the decision is expected to be appealed, it undoubtedly will open the door to a new wave of organizing efforts targeting private college and university faculties. Pacific Lutheran University.
FordHarrison LLP • December 17, 2014
Executive Summary: Perhaps overlooked due to the announcement by the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or the "Board") of its revised procedures for union elections, the NLRB issued a decision on December 11 that will have a far-reaching impact on employers' e-mail systems.
Shaw Valenza LLP • December 15, 2014
In 2007 the National Labor Relations Board held, in The Guard Publishing Company, dba Register Guard, 351 NLRB 1110 (2007), that employers do not have to permit union organizing activity over their own email system.
Franczek Radelet P.C • December 15, 2014
Today, the National Labor Relations Board announced that it has adopted a final rule amending its representation case procedures, implementing the controversial "quickie" or "ambush" election rule that makes sweeping changes to the Board's current procedures. In its press release, the Board characterized its action as "modernizing its rules in light of modern technology, making its procedures more transparent and uniform across regions, and eliminating unnecessary litigation and delay." Barring any legal challenges, the new rule will take effect on April 14, 2015.
Ogletree Deakins • December 15, 2014
On December 11, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) stoked the fire that has been building around issues related to employees’ use of company e-mail for non-work-related issues. It did so when it held that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) supports an employee’s right to use an employer’s e-mail system for non-business purposes, including discussions about union organizing. Purple Communications, Inc. and Communications Workers, AFL-CIO, 361 N.L.R.B. No. 126 (December 11, 2014).
Franczek Radelet P.C • December 12, 2014
The National Labor Relations Board today overruled its Register Guard decision that generally prohibited employees from using their employer’s computers to engage in protected activity, and permitted employers to lawfully discipline employees for doing so. This morning in Purple Communications, the sharply divided Board found that Register Guard was “incorrect in several significant respects,” and expanded employees’ existing rights to communicate in the workplace about their terms and conditions of employment to reach communications over employer e-mail systems as well. Absent “special circumstances” justifying total bans on non-work use of e-mail, the Board’s new Purple Communications standard requires employers to accommodate employees’ use of e-mail for protected concerted activity, subject only to “uniform and consistently enforced controls” that are “necessary to maintain production and discipline.” The decision, which applies retroactively to all cases pending before the Board, carries significant legal implications, and will require all employers to make some immediate policy changes. However, the case may ultimately have fewer practical effects on employers than other recent reversals of NLRB precedent.
FordHarrison LLP • October 16, 2014
Executive Summary: Unions can be difficult enough to manage, even for experienced employers. Imagine taking your workforce of 100 employees and dividing them up into 10 different collective bargaining units… represented by 10 different unions… and 10 different collective bargaining agreements… with 10 different effective dates. Sound like an administrative nightmare? Welcome to the brave new world of "micro-unions." Recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decisions have legitimized the use of such micro bargaining units and, by so doing, have thrust unparalleled confusion into the already murky waters of collective bargaining. This article discusses how the concept of micro-unions came about and how employers can best prepare and protect themselves from having micro-unions form in their workplaces.
Brody and Associates, LLC • October 16, 2014
Last year, the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) put its stamp of approval on “micro-units,” or small groups of employees who may unionize. The Board recently decided two cases involving micro-units in Macy’s and Bergdorf Goodman, which should make employers ask themselves, “Does my business model make it easier for a union to organize my employees?”
Fisher & Phillips LLP • September 04, 2014
Unions and other third parties have never before so heavily used public embarrassment as a means of organizing employees. The key to union organizing is to find a disgruntled employee who will serve as a leader and capitalize on existing workplace problems. These problems are typically compounded by communication breakdowns and ineffective supervisors. Surveys show that the most divisive workplace issues are a sense of unfairness, discrimination, an unsafe workplace, and a sense that the employer does not care about employees.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • September 04, 2014
In the most recent 60-day period, we were aware of 19 petitions filed against hospitality employers.
Ogletree Deakins • August 08, 2014
In two recent decisions, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) reached different conclusions on whether unions can organize small groups of employees in a workplace. While the NLRB’s decisions in Macy’s, Inc. and The Neiman Marcus Group, Inc. d/b/a Bergdorf Goodman, both deal with retail employers, the principles articulated are applicable to employers in all industries. The decisions constitute a roadmap for unions seeking to gain representation rights over workers in single departments or within single job classifications. Employers concerned about union organizing need to understand the new paradigm that the NLRB created with these cases and take proactive steps to counter the expected surge in union organizing.
Ogletree Deakins • June 25, 2014
Does a collective bargaining agreement that requires nonunion home-care workers to pay a fee to a union representative violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution? In the next few days the Supreme Court of the United States will decide this question in a case challenging a state law requiring workers who provide in-home care to disabled individuals through Medicaid-waiver programs to pay “fair share fees.” The case, Harris v. Quinn, will determine the constitutionality of an Illinois law that requires these workers to accept and financially support a union as their exclusive representative to petition the state for greater reimbursements from its Medicaid programs. The Court will also rule on whether the claims brought by some employees who have rejected unionization and are not subject to fair share fees are ripe for judicial review.
FordHarrison LLP • June 10, 2014
Executive Summary: The National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or "Board") recently held that a healthcare employer violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by prohibiting employees from wearing union protest stickers. See HealthBridge Mgmt., LLC, 360 N.L.R.B. No. 118 (June 22, 2014). In the 2-1 decision, the Board found that HealthBridge could not prohibit employees from wearing union protest stickers inside or outside patient care areas because its rules were only selectively enforced, and HealthBridge could not establish "special circumstances" to justify the ban.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 07, 2014
An article by Freedley Hunsicker Jr., was featured in The Legal Intelligencer on May 6, 2014.
Ogletree Deakins • May 07, 2014
On March 26, 2014, a regional director of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided scholarship football players at Northwestern University are employees because they “perform services for the benefit of the employer for which they receive compensation.” A main factor in the regional director’s decision was that the monetary value of football scholarships is “as much as $76,000 per calendar year” meaning that the players receive in “total compensation in excess of one quarter of a million dollars throughout the four or five years they perform football duties.” The regional director also found that Northwestern’s scholarship football players are not primarily students but rather are “employees” under the common law definition. He noted that Northwestern has not treated scholarships or stipends as taxable income but held that not to be dispositive, citing a 2002 case decided by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Seattle Opera v. NLRB.
Ogletree Deakins • April 25, 2014
When a Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that scholarship football players at Northwestern University were employees entitled to vote on union representation, many media reports treated the case as a victory for the union. But as one Lawrence Peter “Yogi” Berra said, “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.” The union scored first, but the game has not been decided.
Ogletree Deakins • April 25, 2014
Late this afternoon, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Washington, D.C. granted the request for review (i.e., an appeal) filed by Northwestern University in the much-watched case involving the status of Northwestern’s grant-in-aid scholarship football players. Northwestern is asking the NLRB to review and reverse the decision of the regional director of the NLRB’s Chicago office, finding that Northwestern’s scholarship football players (but not walk-ons) are “employees” under the law and eligible to vote on the issue of union representation.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • April 07, 2014
Popular support for unionization of college athletes grew out of legitimate safety concerns and recognition that some players may need stipends to supplement their scholarships, Kevin wrote. However, the recent narrowly applicable, politically driven decision to permit scholarship football players at Northwestern University to unionize does more harm than good.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • April 04, 2014
In a historic move, members of the Northwestern University football team recently took initial steps to form a union and seek collective-bargaining rights with the university. Shortly thereafter, the team filed a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In a decision that has some experts scratching their heads, the Board’s Regional Director in Chicago issued a decision finding that scholarship athletes are, in fact, employees under the National Labor Relations Act and are eligible to vote for union representation.
Ogletree Deakins • April 01, 2014
The recent retail and fast food industry protests regarding demands for a “living wage” remind us that corporate campaigns by unions are a form of corporate warfare. They seek to inflict upon employers a “death from a thousand cuts.” Corporate campaign tactics include publicizing extremely negative and often false statements concerning the target company and its executives and attempting to intimidate those doing business with company. The objective is typically to embarrass the target, cause customers to take their business elsewhere, and ultimately force the employer to agree to some union demand.
Franczek Radelet P.C • March 31, 2014
Earlier this week, NLRB Regional Director for Region 13, Peter Sung Ohr, issued a highly publicized decision and ruled that grant-in-aid scholarship football players at Northwestern University are “employees” under the National Labor Relations Act and, as such, have the right to unionize.
Goldberg Segalla LLP • March 31, 2014
By decision dated March 26, 2014, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Regional Director Peter Sung Ohr upheld the findings of a hearing officer which determined that all football players at Northwestern University who receive grant-in-aid scholarships are “employees” within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, and that a petitioned-for unit — comprising all Northwestern University football players receiving scholarships who have not exhausted their playing eligibility — may vote by secret ballot to determine whether the College Athlete Players Association (CAPA) should be their bargaining representative/union.
Ogletree Deakins • March 28, 2014
On March 26, 2014, a regional director for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a decision and direction of election in a union representation petition filed by the College Athletes Players Association (CAPA) seeking to represent Northwestern University’s football players. CAPA, led by former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter, petitioned the Board for a ruling that Northwestern football players who receive grant-in-aid scholarships are university employees and therefore eligible to form a union and engage in collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The United Steelworkers and the National College Players Association supported the student-athletes’ efforts. The university opposed the petition, arguing that scholarship athletes are not employees, but similar to graduate teaching assistants who receive stipends and whom the Board has historically held are not employees because their primary purpose and relationship to their schools is educational, not economic.
Vedder Price • December 13, 2013
In August 2013, employees at more than 1,000 fast-food restaurants in over 50 cities staged work stoppages. Employees took to the streets demanding a wage increase to at least 15 dollars an hour, twice the federal minimum wage. These protests were supported by organized labor as well as community groups such as Justice at Work, a nonprofit organization that provides legal services to support and encourage organization of low-wage immigrant workers. Even though UNITE HERE has traditionally been seen as the main union representing food service workers, it was the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), which represents more than two million workers in health care, janitorial and other industries, that provided financial support and training for local organizers across the country in preparation for the strikes.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 04, 2013
If you've been following the news, you probably realize that it has been a busy year for organized labor. The percentage of unionized workers in the private sector has fallen to historic lows, leaving unions with fewer dues-paying members, and motivating them to adopt new tactics to stem the decline. Exploiting a more favorable environment created by recent NLRB decisions promoting unionization, unions are turning their focus to grassroots organizations, social media, and previously uncharted geographical territory in an effort to revitalize their base.
Brody and Associates, LLC • November 05, 2013
The Sixth Circuit Court recently held in Kindred Nursing Centers East, LLC v. NLRB that the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) did not abuse its discretion in Specialty Healthcare, a decision allowing the creation of “micro-bargaining units” e.g., small groups of employees, in non-acute healthcare facilities.
Jones Walker • October 29, 2013
A New Orleans-based labor union has begun using the new federal health insurance exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act in an effort to unionize workers over a three-state territory, including Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. That's according to an alert issued on October 24, 2013, by the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry ("LABI"). Click here to read the full text of the alert and learn who's behind the new union organizing scheme and how it works.
ManpowerGroup • March 12, 2013
The new FMLA rule went into effect March 8. Are you ready?
Fisher & Phillips LLP • March 05, 2013
With union membership rates at their lowest level since the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) was enacted in 1935, organized labor is desperately seeking to attract new members, even if that means targeting new industries that have traditionally been ignored. Over the past few months, unions have been busy sparking drives to organize retail and fast food service workers across the country.
Brody and Associates, LLC • February 18, 2013
Change may be coming for employers who hire labor relations consultants, including attorneys, to conduct union-related activities.
Brody and Associates, LLC • February 11, 2013
Union boss Richard Trumka, head of the AFL-CIO, is predicting the return of one of the biggest threats to American employers – “card check” legislation.
Brody and Associates, LLC • December 19, 2012
Most employers are reluctant to talk about unions and haven’t done it.
Ogletree Deakins • December 14, 2012
First, somewhat as an aside, the news coverage of this issue reminds me that any time I follow an issue that is covered by the media and falls into an area where I have my own expertise, I always come away with one thought - yikes. And then I quickly remind myself, I need to apply more skepticism to other things that the talking heads say in areas where I don't have any particular expertise.
Franczek Radelet P.C • December 11, 2012
A trio of cases currently pending before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) could drastically affect employment relationships within higher education. At stake in all three cases are members of the university community’s right to organize, join, form, and assist labor unions. We have been closely following major developments in all three cases, and because decisions are likely to be issued before the end of the year, we want to re-focus your attention on these potentially landmark cases.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 07, 2012
We are aware of only ten petitions filed during the month of October, the last month for which we have any reports.
Franczek Radelet P.C • June 27, 2012
In what appears to be a continuing effort to revisit key labor decisions involving private colleges and universities, the National Labor Relations Board agreed to hear companion cases involving the rights of graduate students to join and form unions. This announcement comes on the heels of the Board’s invitation for interested parties to file amicus briefs addressing whether the NLRB should overturn its longstanding Yeshiva University case, which held that professors at private Universities are barred from unionizing, which we previously reported.
Franczek Radelet P.C • May 30, 2012
Last week, the Democratic majority of the National Labor Relations Board invited interested parties to file amicus briefs addressing whether faculty members at private higher education institutions are eligible to unionize under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Courts and the Board itself have long considered this issue resolved by a 1980 Supreme Court decision, NLRB v. Yeshiva University, which essentially barred the formation of full-time faculty unions at private institutions because their role in the shared governance of their institutions renders them “managers.” The Board’s recent invitation suggests that it plans to reconsider that position and may establish new criteria for applying the Yeshiva decision, paving the way for full-time faculty unions at private colleges and universities.
Franczek Radelet P.C • May 18, 2012
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has taken some high profile hits in the federal courts in the past few weeks. As we reported recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit put the NLRB’s notice posting rule on hold. Earlier this week, a federal judge also halted, for now, the NLRB’s “quickie election” rule. Late last week, the NLRB suffered another defeat when the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit refused to enforce an NLRB decision that found Starbucks had violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by prohibiting its employees from wearing more than one pro-union button on their uniforms.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 07, 2012
After winning 73% of elections in healthcare units in 2011, unions seeking to organize more healthcare workers are preparing to exploit opportunities arising from significant new rule changes and recent decisions by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Hospitals, nursing homes, home health agencies, clinics and other healthcare employers who want to preserve their union-free status must therefore be prepared for a significant uptick in activity.
Ogletree Deakins • May 02, 2012
Earlier this morning I received an email forwarded from the management company in the downtown office building where I work, advising that there could be traffic issues arising out of protest activities planned for this afternoon.
Brody and Associates, LLC • April 27, 2012
The chief lawyer for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) knows that guidance on how to craft a lawful social media policy is weak at best. He also knows guidelines for when to discipline employees for improper Internet comments is equally obscure. In January, the general counsel issued his second paper summarizing the NLRB’s decisions on this point. Some general guidelines are emerging, but more questions than answers remain.
Shaw Valenza LLP • April 27, 2012
The NLRB revised its procedures for handling "representation" cases - the NLRB proceedings that relate to elections.
Phelps Dunbar LLP • April 20, 2012
On April 17, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an injunction preventing the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") from enforcing its employee notice posting rule, which had been scheduled to become enforceable on April 30, 2012. See Nat'l Ass'n of Mfrs. v. NLRB, Case No. 12-5068 (D.C. Cir. April 17, 2012). In issuing the injunction, the Circuit Court noted conflicting lower court decisions and held that "[t]he uncertainty about enforcement counsels further in favor of temporarily preserving the status quo while this court resolves all of the issues on the merits."
This ruling means that employers are not required to post an employee rights notice by April 30, 2012 informing employees of their rights to, among other things, organize into unions, engage in collective bargaining, discuss wages, benefits, and working conditions or to refrain from any of these activities.
Shaw Valenza LLP • April 18, 2012
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals enjoined the NLRB's implementation of the poster in an order here.
Franczek Radelet P.C • April 18, 2012
Employers across the country can breathe a little easier today, as an appellate court has put the National Labor Relations Board’s notice posting rule on hold. It will not take effect on April 30.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • April 17, 2012
For months now, the business community has been bracing for the implementation of two key pro-labor initiatives on April 30, courtesy of the National Labor Relations Board: 1) an expedited election rule designed to cut the period between petition and election in half; and 2) a first-ever mandatory-posting requirement that would educate employees as to their representation rights, while laying the groundwork for unfair labor practice charges and extended limitations periods against those employers who fail to comply. The first initiative is proceeding on course, despite ongoing challenges that will ultimately be played out before the courts.
Ogletree Deakins • April 17, 2012
On April 13, 2012, a federal district court in South Carolina invalidated the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) notice posting rule. Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. NLRB, No. 2:11-cv-02516-DCN, U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina (April 13, 2012).
Brody and Associates, LLC • March 27, 2012
A recent court decision upheld the NLRBâ€™s authority to require the poster and denied a challenge on free-speech grounds, but it was not a total victory for the agency.
Phelps Dunbar LLP • March 12, 2012
A federal judge has ruled that implementation of a rule, requiring most private sector employers to post notice of employee union rights, will not be stayed pending an appeal of the court ruling allowing it to proceed.
Franczek Radelet P.C • March 09, 2012
As we noted in an alert last week, the District Court for the District of Columbia issued its final order in National Association of Manufacturers v. NLRB on the challenge by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) to the National Labor Relations Boardâ€™s notice posting rule. The court upheld the legality of the notice posting rule itself and, earlier this week, the court declined to block enforcement of the rule while NAM and NFIB appeal the decision. Accordingly, employers still face an April 30, 2012, notice posting deadline, barring another successful court or legislative challenge.
ManpowerGroup • March 07, 2012
A federal judge upheld the NLRB posting rule but rejected two of its rather onerous penalties.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • March 05, 2012
Today, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia invalidated key provisions of the National Labor Relations Board's "Notification of Employee Rights" rule, under which all covered employers would have been required after April 30th of this year to post an 11" x 17" poster, or else to face possible legal consequences. While she left the actual posting requirement intact, she ruled that the proposed penalties attached to the Board's rule were unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Ogletree Deakins • March 05, 2012
On March 2, 2012, a federal trial judge in the District of Columbia issued a highly-anticipated ruling on the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) controversial notice posting rule. The court held that the NLRB did not exceed its statutory authority by requiring employers to post its "Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act." In language that seems at first favorable to employers, the court ruled that a failure to post is not automatically an unfair labor practice and does not automatically toll the statute of limitations in unfair labor practice actions. A closer reading, however, reveals that the court opened the door for the NLRB to find, on a case-by-case basis, violations and tolling for failure to post, thus allowing the Board to accomplish by decision what it cannot do by rulemaking.
Ogletree Deakins • March 05, 2012
On March 2, 2012, a federal trial judge in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a highly-anticipated ruling on the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) controversial notice posting rule. National Association of Manufacturers v. NLRB, No. 11-1629 (ABJ), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (March 2, 2012).
Franczek Radelet P.C • March 02, 2012
Today a federal district court judge partially invalidated the National Labor Relations Boardâ€™s (NLRB) rule requiring private sector employers to post a notice informing employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Ogletree Deakins • January 03, 2012
As most employers now are aware, on August 25, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced its final rule related to the Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Under that rule, private-sector employers whose workplaces fall under NLRA jurisdiction will be required to post a notice of employee rights regarding unionization. The final rule requires employers to post and maintain the NLRB notice in conspicuous places, and to take â€œreasonable stepsâ€ to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material, or otherwise rendered unreadable.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 28, 2011
As we notified our clients several months ago, the NLRB recently issued a new notice-posting requirement, mandating that employers post an oversized (11" x 17") Notice of Employee Rights. See our August 25 Legal Alert. Because of the pressure of legal actions challenging the new rule, the implementation date was first pushed back from November 9 to January 31, which we noted in an updated Legal Alert on October 6.
Franczek Radelet P.C • December 28, 2011
On December 23, the National Labor Relations Board announced that it was postponing the effective date of its rule requiring covered employers to post a notice informing employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. You can read the NLRB's press release here. The notice posting requirement was scheduled to take effect on January 31st, but has now been pushed back to April 30, 2012.
Nexsen Pruet • December 28, 2011
In August, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued regulations requiring virtually all employers to post a large notice to employees informing them of rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), particularly their right to unionize. In December, the NLRB postponed the effective date until April 30th, 2012.
Phelps Dunbar LLP • October 13, 2011
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has postponed the implementation date for its new notice-posting rule by more than two months in order to allow for enhanced education and outreach to employers, particularly those who operate small and medium sized businesses.
Ogletree Deakins • October 06, 2011
On October 5, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a press release announcing its decision to postpone the implementation date for the new NLRA employee rights notice. According to the NLRB, the initial effective date of November 14, 2011 has now been pushed back to January 31, 2012 to allow for enhanced education and outreach to employers.
Franczek Radelet P.C • September 26, 2011
As we reported in late August, the NLRB announced a final rule requiring private sector employers to post a notice of employee rights under the NLRA. This past week, the NLRB published copies of its new poster. A copy is available from the NLRB website. Employers have the option of downloading a single 11â€ x 17â€ poster, or two 8.5â€ x 11â€ posters. Copies are also available at the Boardâ€™s regional offices. The final rule requires employers to begin displaying these posters by November 14, 2011.
Franczek Radelet P.C • September 20, 2011
As we reported in late August, the NLRB announced a final rule requiring private sector employers to post a notice of employee rights under the NLRA. This past week, the NLRB published copies of its new poster. A copy is available from the NLRB website. Employers have the option of downloading a single 11â€ x 17â€ poster, or two 8.5â€ x 11â€ posters. Copies are also available at the Boardâ€™s regional offices. The final rule requires employers to begin displaying these posters by November 14, 2011.
Ogletree Deakins • September 07, 2011
Any thoughts on how the following legislative finding might fare in today's Congress?
Ogletree Deakins • September 06, 2011
As expected, the end of Chairman Wilma Liebman's term at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) did not end without an onslaught of radical, precedent-reversing decisions. On August 30, the Board published three very significant 3-1 decisions signed by Liebman in the closing hours of her term.
Franczek Radelet P.C • September 02, 2011
As we predicted in September 2010, with the Employee Free Choice Act stalled in Congress, a majority of the National Labor Relations Board (the â€œBoardâ€) has taken the opportunity to overturn two key employer-friendly decisions from the Bush-era Board, boosting the prospects for union card check campaigns.
Nexsen Pruet • August 30, 2011
On August 25, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued regulations requiring virtually all employers to post a large notice to employees informing them of rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), particularly their right to unionize. Employers must post the notice beginning November 14, 2011.
Jones Walker • August 29, 2011
Under a new rule published by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board), most private sector employers will
be required to post a workplace notice of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) starting
November 14, 2011. In essence, the notice informs employees that they have the right to form and join unions, bargain
collectively with their employers, and to engage in other protected concerted activities, or to refrain from engaging in any
of those activities. Specific rights are outlined, as well as prohibited conduct by employers and unions.
Ogletree Deakins • August 29, 2011
On August 25, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a press release in which it announced its final rule related to the Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Private-sector employers (including labor organizations) whose workplaces fall under the jurisdiction of the NLRA will be required to post a notice of employee rights under that Act. In addition, employers who customarily post notices to employees regarding personnel rules or policies on an internet or intranet site will be required to post the Boardâ€™s notice at those sites. The proposed rule has been pending since December of last year, and will take effect on November 14, 2011, at which time the required notices must be posted.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 26, 2011
n August 25, 2011, over the dissent of Member Brian Hayes, the National Labor Relations Board issued a final rule addressing "Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act." Effective 75 days following the August 26, 2011 scheduled publication in the Federal Register, which would be November 9, or November 14 (per the NLRB's inconsistent press release), every employer covered by the National Labor Relations Act will be required to post the prescribed 11x17 inch notice.
Franczek Radelet P.C • August 26, 2011
In December 2010, Franczek Radelet notified employers that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had announced a proposed rule which would require employers to post a notice of employee rights under the NLRA. On August 25, 2011, the Board announced that a final rule regarding this posting requirement will go into effect for all employers subject to the Boardâ€™s jurisdiction on November 14, 2011.
Ogletree Deakins • August 26, 2011
On August 25, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a press release announcing its final rule on Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The proposed rule had been pending since December of last year.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 05, 2011
In recent years, unions have continued to realize greater success in organizing healthcare employees than employees in other industries. Union win rates in the healthcare sector have been at or above 70%, generally about 10% above their win rates in other sectors. Additionally, more elections are taking place in the healthcare industry. The total jumped from 220 elections in 2009 to 305 elections in 2010.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • July 21, 2011
By now you're aware of the NLRB's proposed rule changes aimed at speeding up elections to make it easier for unions to organize. (See our Legal Alert "Unions In Decline? Labor Board To The Rescue!" June 30, 2011).
Ogletree Deakins • July 19, 2011
Finally, after over a decade of litigation, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued its decision in New York New York LLC, 356 NLRB No. 119 (March 25, 2011) on remand from the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals. Based on the Boardâ€™s precedent-setting ruling, we could have waited a little longer.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • July 01, 2011
The failure of the Employee Free Choice Act to become law does not mean that unions are giving up, or that their elected and appointed officials are throwing in the towel on their efforts to increase unions' ever-shrinking share of the American work force. Last week the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) took a giant step in that direction.
Nexsen Pruet • May 13, 2011
Recent pro-union actions by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are making it easier to unionize employees. One of the latest potential changes involves micro-unions, a possible outcome of Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Mobile and United Steelworkers, District 9, a case pending before the NLRB.
Ogletree Deakins • January 28, 2011
In a January 13, 2011, letter to newly-elected Attorney General Alan Wilson, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) threatened to file suit against South Carolina if the General Assembly ratifies the recently passed constitutional amendment guaranteeing individuals the right to a secret ballot vote on the issue of union representation. The letter, written by Acting NLRB General Counsel Lafe Solomon, asserts that federal labor law preempts state law ï¿½ including state constitutional provisions ï¿½ and gives him the right to file suit in federal court to hold the conflicting state provision unconstitutional.
Ogletree Deakins • December 30, 2010
The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) is one of the few federal employment/labor laws which does not include a specific provision requiring employers to post a notice related to employee rights under that law.
Shaw Valenza LLP • December 22, 2010
The National Labor Relations Board is proposing a regulation that requires all employers under the NLRB's jurisdiction - both union and non-union- to post a notice explaining to employees their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. That notice will include helpful information like how to file an unfair labor practice complaint, the right to collectively bargain and elect a union, etc. The entire contents of the notice is posted below. The proposed regulations currently require qualifying employers to post the notice on paper with the other millions of government posters, and also send the notice out by email or put it on a company intranet. Multiple languages, etc. too.
Ogletree Deakins • December 17, 2010
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently issued a decision finding that an employer must distribute remedial notices electronically when that is a customary means of communication with its employees. As a result, the NLRB modified its standard notice posting provision - which requires posting of remedial notices in all places where notices to employees are customarily posted - to expressly include electronic communications.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 06, 2010
Disneyland is known as "The Happiest Place On Earth." But UNITE HERE Local 11, the Union that represents the park's 2,100 hotel employees, is not in a happy place. For close to three years now, it has been bargaining over a new labor contract. During that time, the union has staged protests and walk-outs, had its members engage in a week-long hunger strike and gone on a one-day quickie strike. But no matter what the union has done to force the issue, no new labor agreement has been reached.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 06, 2010
It's common for fast food workers in Canada, Germany, France and Australia to be represented by a union. But in America less than 2% of fast food workers are unionized – and most of them work in stores located on college campuses, in hospitals or in government buildings where labor unions are commonplace. Indeed, until very recently, the conventional wisdom among union leadership was that employees working in freestanding fast food restaurants were simply too short-sighted, too transient, or too timid, to be viable targets for union organizing. Accordingly, even though it promises the possibility of hundreds of thousands of new union members, the fast food industry has gone largely ignored by unions. All of that may soon change.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 06, 2010
Hotels and other entities should expect unions to routinely use OSHA citations as an organizing tool and a way to harass hospitality employers. In a recent Hospitality Update, we described a May 12 Houston Chronicle article complaining about the allegedly high rate of ergonomic injuries suffered by hotel employees. [See "Multiple Embarrassing OSHA Citations: The Next Union Organizing Tactic?" by Howard Mavity. Hospitality Update, June, 2010.]
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 02, 2010
It comes as no surprise that employers in the last several years have been forced to focus on survival in an extremely difficult environment. There have been sharply decreased (or nonexistent) profit margins, falling sales, reorganizations, reductions in force, retrenchment and reversion to the mean. Overall business conditions aren't really much better now than they were three years ago and nobody really knows when they will improve.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • October 06, 2010
Even with the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) now seemingly DOA, major reform of labor law is not far off. Wilma Liebman and the three new Obama appointees, including Craig Becker, are now in the driver's seat at the National Labor Relations Board. Big Labor justifiably expects the Liebman/Becker-led Board to deliver on Obama's campaign promises and to revamp federal labor law in its favor.
Franczek Radelet P.C • September 07, 2010
This week, the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) made two announcements, the results of which could further the administration’s EFCA agenda without the need to pass legislation. Most prominently, the Board will revisit its 2007 Dana decision through review of two sets of cases that question when a union’s support among employees can be challenged (Rite Aid Store #6473 / Lamons Gasket Co. and UGL-UNICCO Service Co. / Grocery Haulers Inc.). Dana has been widely cited as legal support for maintaining secret ballot elections in lieu of the union-supported card-check procedures in EFCA.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • September 07, 2010
This is a message to our clients who have union-free operations. We assume that you operate non-union for a reason, and that you work hard to ensure that you preserve and maintain your non-union status. In case you needed one, here is just one more reason that remaining non-union gives you an edge in managing your operation.
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP • August 09, 2010
Unionization of Private Colleges’ And Universities’ Graduate Students.
Ogletree Deakins • June 24, 2010
New requirements under Executive Order 13496 could appear in federal contracts and subcontracts as early as this week. The final rule, published on May 21, becomes effective June 21, 2010. Fortunately or unfortunately, the Federal Acquisition Regulation Council (FAR Council) has not yet issued an implementing FAR that will require the employee notice to be posted.
Franczek Radelet P.C • June 23, 2010
Effective June 21, 2010, employers who conduct business with the federal government or who perform work essential to a federal contract now must post a notice informing their employees of their right to join a union and engage in concerted activity.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • June 04, 2010
The Department of Labor's Office of Labor Management Standards (OLMS) published a final rule on May 20, 2010, implementing Executive Order (EO) 13496: Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Labor Laws. This EO mandates that all government contracting departments and agencies include a provision in most government contracts stipulating that the contractor post a notice "in all places where notices to employees are customarily posted both physically and electronically," informing them of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In turn, covered contractors are required to include a similar provision in subcontracts that are necessary to the performance of the government contract and in an amount in excess of $10,000.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • June 03, 2010
While many union organizers seem to have moved to D.C. to become lobbyists, UNITE/HERE, the SEIU, and other unions continue to aggressively campaign against hospitality employers. Campaigns are becoming even more nasty than in the past. Unions consciously harm the property's reputation and inflict costly wage-hour, discrimination, and OSHA costs that may weaken the employer's resolve.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 24, 2010
A final rule issued May 20, 2010, provides the poster federal contractors and sub-contractors are required to post to provide employees notice of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. This rule implements President Obama's Executive Order 13496, signed January 30, 2009. The Order has two requirements for covered federal contractors and sub-contractors; (1) post with other employee notices, including electronically, the "Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act" poster and (2) include the language of the employee notice requirement.
Ogletree Deakins • May 24, 2010
Pursuant to a Department of Labor (DOL) Final Rule published on May 20 and going into effect on June 21, 2010, federal contractors and subcontractors subject to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) will be required to include certain language in their contracts and to conspicuously post notices of employee rights under federal labor laws. The Final Rule describes the content of the notice required to be posted by contractors and most subcontractors, and outlines the penalties that can be imposed for noncompliance. This Final Rule, published in today’s Federal Register, implements Executive Order 13496, signed by President Barack Obama in January of last year.
Ogletree Deakins • April 23, 2010
BNA's Daily Labor Report ($) has an article based on its in depth interview with the soon to be former head of the SEIU, Andy Stern, that is well worth the read.
Ogletree Deakins • April 05, 2010
The union membership statistics for 2009 suggest that organized labor has lost ground over the past year. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' report on annual union membership, private sector unions lost 834,000 members in 2009, bringing membership down to 7.2 percent of the private sector workforce (compared to 7.6 percent in 2008). Overall union membership, however, held steady at 12.3 percent in 2009. This was largely due to public sector union membership, which rose slightly from 36.8 percent in 2008 to 37.4 percent last year.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 01, 2009
While our crystal ball is no better than anyone else's, change in our country's labor laws appears to be drawing ever closer. While EFCA as it was originally proposed with its elimination of secret-ballot elections is undergoing change, a lot of other tweaking has been going on lately in the Senate reflecting unions' desire to find some form of legislation which will pass and which will give them the stimulus they need to revitalize their efforts to halt the continuing loss of union jobs and members.
Ogletree Deakins • November 03, 2009
For the past several years, the business community's attention has been focused almost exclusively on federal legislation inaccurately named the "Employee Free Choice Act" (EFCA). That legislation would radically overhaul labor-management relations by substituting "card check" (employees' signatures on union cards) in place of government-protected secret ballot union representation elections, and by compelling arbitration of first contracts written by federally-appointed arbitrators where the union and the employer fail to agree after 120 days of bargaining. EFCA also contains anti-employer penalties and fines of $20,000 per violation and triple back pay, as well as federal court injunctions.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • November 02, 2009
We all know that union membership has been on the decline for decades. But with a new administration in the White House, and Democrat majorities in the House and Senate, employers should expect significant labor law reforms and dramatically different enforcement strategies that will make it easier for labor unions to organize employees. In fact, hopeful labor leaders proclaim that the expected changes could add up to 1.5 million new members per year for the next 15 years.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • October 05, 2009
With membership at its lowest point in over 60 years, unions are steadfastly proving they still know how to play politics. Organized labor has recently taken steps to reinforce its ranks through legislation, introducing significant reform efforts such as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). The Act, in effect, would eliminate secret ballot elections from the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) related to union organizing, substitute card check verification instead, and make employer neutrality mandatory in the electoral process.
Ogletree Deakins • August 13, 2009
On August 3, 2009, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a proposed rule to implement President Barack Obama’s recent Executive Order 13496 requiring federal contractors to inform employees of their rights under federal labor laws, including the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Executive Order 13496 requires covered contractors to include certain language in their contracts and to conspicuously post notices of employee rights under federal labor laws. The proposed rule describes the content of the required notice, which contractors and subcontractors must post, and the penalties that can be imposed for noncompliance.
Ogletree Deakins • April 14, 2009
After much speculation, the Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 (EFCA) was introduced in the 111th Congress on March 10. The bills introduced in both the House of Representatives, H.R. 1409, and Senate, S. 560, are identical to last year's measure, which passed the House but stalled in the Senate due to a filibuster on the motion to debate the bill on the Senate Floor. This year's bills were introduced with fewer original cosponsors amid increasing concerns regarding the economic impact of "card check" and compulsory arbitration of first contracts.
Jones Walker • March 19, 2009
The grossly misnamed and highly controversial Employee Free Choice Act (“EFCA”) was introduced by Senators Ted
Kennedy (D-MA) and Tom Harkin (D-IA), and Representative George Miller (D-CA) in the 111th Congress on March
10, 2009 (H.R. 1409, S. 560). The legislative fight over EFCA is a battle royale between business and organized labor and
is a defining moment in the history of labor relations in the United States. The President of the U. S. Chamber of
Commerce, Tom Donahue, in a major address in Washington last week, called this legislation “Armageddon” and a
“game changer.” EFCA is clearly the most ambitious and transformative piece of labor legislation to come before
Congress since the 1935 enactment of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) and would radically alter the balance
of power between management and labor.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • March 11, 2009
The Employee Free Choice Act was introduced in both houses of Congress today. The bill would allow labor unions to bypass secret ballot representation elections that have been in place for 75 years in favor of a streamlined process known as "card check." It also contains binding arbitration provisions that would allow an outside arbitrator to dictate the terms of a first contract in the event that the parties cannot reach agreement within the first four months of negotiations, and it would impose substantially increased penalties against employers who commit unfair labor practices.
Ogletree Deakins • March 10, 2009
After much speculation, the Employee Free Choice Act of 2009 (EFCA) was introduced on March 10 in the 111th Congress. The new bills introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate are identical to last year’s bill, which passed the House but was stalled in the Senate by a filibuster on the motion to debate the bill on the Senate Floor.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • February 04, 2009
Employers are rightfully concerned and even alarmed about what to expect from the new Congress and the Obama Administration. Democrats are firmly in control and owe much to organized labor and other constituencies that are not necessarily employer-friendly. So, what can healthcare expect in the new year and beyond?
Shaw Valenza LLP • January 19, 2009
The inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama is just a few days away. Congress will assemble with solid Democratic majorities in each house. The new administration doubtless will breathe new life into bills that have languished in Congress during the past eight years.
Nexsen Pruet • December 04, 2008
Employers can expect that efforts will be made to significantly change employment and labor laws and regulations over the next several months. Nexsen Pruet Employment and Labor Law attorneys David Dubberly, William Floyd, Cherie Blackburn and Mike Brittingham provide a briefing to help clients prepare for the changes.
Ogletree Deakins • December 04, 2008
In a historic and hard-fought election, Senator Barack Obama was elected the 44th President of the United States earlier this month. President-elect Obama will be the first African-American president in the country's history.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • December 03, 2008
Gallons of ink have been spilled by lawyers and journalists concerning the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). But this law is likely to have a particular effect on retailers, and retailers – more so than other employers – should start planning for the worst now.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • November 25, 2008
Organized labor's membership in the private sector has plummeted below 8 % – an all time low. To address this problem, unions have turned to an aggressive legislative agenda designed to tilt the scales in their favor. Among the items on their priority list are the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and the Re-Employment of Skilled and Professional Employees and Construction Tradeworkers Act (RESPECT Act).
Jones Walker • November 25, 2008
The recently concluded Presidential and Congressional elections have organized labor
salivating over the likely passage of the so-called and grossly misnamed Employee Free
Choice Act (“EFCA”). EFCA, which actually would eliminate “employee free choice”
concerning unionization, is at the very top of organized labor’s very aggressive legislative
agenda and enjoys the strong support of President-elect Barack Obama. You cannot
underestimate how dramatically the enactment of this misguided and ham-handed legislation
could change your workplace and jeopardize your business and the livelihoods of
your employees. The proposed law is nothing short of a power grab by unions. At this
point, EFCA is still only proposed legislation, and no one knows exactly what form it
will take upon final passage. One thing is certain, however: with strong Democrat majorities
in both the House and Senate, and a President who is eager to sign the legislation,
EFCA is certain to become law in some form, and employers need to begin preparing
for it now.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • November 06, 2008
By now, most hospital and healthcare leaders recognize that their employees represent an increasingly inviting organizing target for unions such as the Service Employees' International Union (SEIU) and the California Nurses Association (CNA). If any question remains, it is "when," not "if" one or more unions will mount some sort of an offensive at your facility.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • September 22, 2008
Organized labor's density in the private sector has plummeted below 8% – an all time low. To address this problem, unions are increasingly turning to an aggressive legislative agenda designed to tilt the scales in their favor. Among those items at the top of their priority list are the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) and the Re-Employment of Skilled and Professional Employees and Construction Tradeworkers Act (the RESPECT).
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 04, 2008
The election looms. No one can say with certainty what the results will be. The political scene may shift dramatically in a few months. But organized labor is as excited as a child on Christmas Eve. Conventional wisdom feeds this optimism.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • June 05, 2008
There have been 24 union petitions at hospitality employers, that we are aware of, filed since the beginning of 2008.
Ogletree Deakins • June 03, 2008
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a decision by the National Labor Relations Board related to a hospital’s prohibition on union buttons. According to the Ninth Circuit, prohibiting the buttons violated nurse/employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 06, 2008
While their overall membership rates continue to decline, unions remain focused on attracting and organizing new dues-paying members in the relatively untapped healthcare market. Maintaining a historic trend, union membership dropped again last year; it's now less than 9% of the private sector workforce, roughly 12.0% counting public employers.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 05, 2008
Most of our readers have heard of the "Employee Free Choice Act" (EFCA). The bill passed the U.S. House of Representatives, but was subject to a Republican Party filibuster in the Senate. This union and Democratic Party-sponsored legislation would eliminate secret ballot elections regarding union representation in a workplace, and instead make such representation automatic and mandatory if more than 50% of employees in a bargaining unit signed union authorization cards.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • May 02, 2008
Organized labor's efforts to unionize auto dealerships continued unabated during 2007. While these efforts will no doubt continue in 2008, federal legislative changes loom on the horizon which, if enacted, will significantly increase the number of successful unionization efforts. Regardless of whether these changes are implemented, dealerships should consider implementing an updated pre-campaign strategy designed to anticipate and adapt to labor's evolving unionization efforts.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • April 15, 2008
Fresh from its "victory" in an election at Cypress Fairbanks Hospital in Houston, the California Nurses Association (CNA) has wasted no time in launching a wide-spread direct mail campaign that targets registered nurses in several states. The full color tri-fold campaign pieces, which have been arriving in nurses' homes during the past 10 days, include union authorization cards. At a minimum, nurses in Texas, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky and Illinois have received these mailers.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • April 08, 2008
It has been no secret that high-profile unions are devoting considerable resources to their attempts to organize employees in the healthcare industry. Bolstered by success in California, New York, Illinois and Florida, the California Nurses Association (CNA) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) have now set their sights on the vast, relatively untapped state of Texas.
Ogletree Deakins • April 01, 2008
On February 15, 2008, the Office of the General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued two guideline memoranda to Regional Directors, Officers-in-Charge, and Resident Officers, outlining the NLRB's rationale in two recent decisions, and providing guidance for analyzing, investigating, and pleading union "salting" claims in light of those decisions.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • March 12, 2008
The rule of thumb for employers facing union campaigns dictates that managers may offer employees facts about unions, their opinions on unions in general, or their personal experiences in previous dealings with unions. The general limitation on this rule is that employers may not threaten employees, interrogate or spy on them, or promise benefits in exchange for opposing the union.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • August 09, 2007
Employers who have been involved in union election campaigns know that it's important to educate employees on all aspects of unionism, in order to counter the union's often pie-in-the-sky promises of more money, better benefits, and a chicken in every pot.
Ogletree Deakins • July 30, 2007
Organized labor has a new target in sight - the healthcare industry - and it has begun using creative ways to make an initial contact and to identify individuals who might be receptive to the union's message. Contacts have focused on social activism, legislative efforts, and improving the quality of patient care, although these issues may not be the union's true organizing objective.
Ogletree Deakins • July 30, 2007
The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) recently announced the creation of a "new national healthcare union" called "SEIU Healthcare." This major initiative could have significant ramifications on union organizing in healthcare.
Ogletree Deakins • June 28, 2007
The federal appellate court with jurisdiction over South Carolina employers recently ruled against a nonunion employer who fired an employee for dishonesty after he started distributing union materials. According to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, there was sufficient evidence that the employer, which did not thoroughly investigate the dishonesty allegation, was motivated by anti-union animus.
Nexsen Pruet • March 07, 2007
With the political shift in Congress, several important labor or employment laws may significantly change.
Ogletree Deakins • March 06, 2007
Today, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 241-185 to pass H.R. 800, the misnamed "Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) of 2007." With its passage by the House, organized labor's efforts to overhaul the Nation's labor laws cleared its first legislative hurdle. The bill now goes to the U.S. Senate that will take up either the House-passed bill or a companion bill to be introduced by Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Edward Kennedy (D-MA).
Fisher & Phillips LLP • February 22, 2007
It seems incredible that, in America of all places, arguments must be
mustered to support the idea of a secret-ballot election. Yet that is
exactly the situation in the current Congress. Rep. George Miller
(D-CA), current chairman of the House Education and Labor
Committee, has introduced the oddly-named “Employee Free Choice
Act,” (EFCA) perhaps better known as the “card check” bill. Its purpose
is to eliminate the right of employees to decide via secret ballot whether
they wish to be represented by a labor union or not.
Ogletree Deakins • February 14, 2007
New Congressional Leadership Introduces Union Organizing Measure To Guarantee Union Contracts.
Ogletree Deakins • January 26, 2007
Sieck guaranteed success in organizing, mandated contracts.