Total Articles: 11
"Effectively Recommend" Dissected
In a line of decisions known as the Kentucky River cases, the Board took aim at re-defining “assign,” “responsibly to direct,” and “independent judgment” in Section 2(11) of the NLRA as it relates to supervisory status. In DirecTV U.S. DirecTV Holdings LLC, 357 NLRB No. 149 (2011), the Board took the opportunity to dissect the meaning of “effectively recommend” as it relates to supervisory status. In light of the Board’s conclusions, employers should consider how much post-supervisor review is built into disciplinary processes, especially with respect to statutory supervisor status issues under the NLRA.
Fifth Circuit Affirms NLRB Holding that Investment Manager and Resort Were Joint Employers
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that an investment manager and a Hawaiian resort owned and operated by a subsidiary of the investment manager were a “single employer” under the National Labor Relations Act and were jointly and severally liable for unfair labor practices stemming from their failure to allow union officials access to hotel workers and prohibiting the union from collecting dues at the resort. Oaktree Capital Mgmt. LP v. NLRB, 5th Cir., No. 10-60749, unpublished opinion 9/26/11.
Hotel Lawfully Fired Front Desk Supervisor For Wearing Union Button.
In Sheraton Universal Hotel, a case handled by BRG&S partner Matt Wakefield, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) ruled that the Sheraton Universal Hotel did not violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when it fired Front Desk Supervisor Kevin Grace, who had contacted a union about providing representation after refusing to stop wearing a union button while on duty. The dispute centered on whether Grace was a supervisor within the meaning of the NLRA, because supervisors are not protected under the NLRA. The NLRB overturned a decision by an administrative law judge (ALJ) and found that Grace was a supervisor; thus, his termination did not violate the NLRA.
Organized Labor Urges Congress to Modify Definition of Supervisor.
Hot on the heels of the Employee Free Choice Act, organized labor is pushing another piece of legislation with a catchy, if not misleading, name. In late March, supporters introduced the RESPECT Act in both the U.S. House and Senate. Short for the Re-Empowerment of Skilled and Professional Employee and Construction Tradeworkers Act, the RESPECT Act is no ode to Aretha Franklin. Rather, it would amend the definition of supervisor under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and undo the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) recent Oakwood decision.
Federal Court Finds NLRA Applies to Casino Operated by Native American Tribe.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) applies to employment at a casino operated by a Native American tribe on its reservation. See San Manuel Indian Bingo & Casino v. NLRB (D.C. Cir. 2007). In reaching this determination, the court held that the application of the NLRA to the San Manuel Casino would not significantly impair tribal sovereignty; thus federal Indian law does not preclude the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) from applying the NLRA to a casino owned and operated by the tribe.
Definition of Supervisor Expanded by the National Labor Relations Board.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) is the federal agency charged with enforcement of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act), which governs the relationships between employers, their employees, and unions. The Act also covers non-union employees who engage in group activities relating to terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. In 1947, the Act was amended to exclude supervisors from its protection.
Who is a "Supervisor"? (pdf).
NLRB's recent ruling creates controversy.
National Labor Relations Board's Recent Decision May Mean More "Supervisors" for Hospitals and Other Employers (pdf).
The ruling will impact many industries and employers.
Labor Board Provides Guidance on Supervisor Status (pdf).
Under the National Labor Relations Act, employers may exclude supervisors from an employee bargaining unit and thus the determination of whether an individual is or is not a supervisor is of great import to employers and unions. On September 29, 2006, the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) issued three longawaited decisions clarifying the defi nition of supervisor under section 2(11) of the Act. Long before they were announced, organized labor politicized the anticipated decisions as a proxy for the Boards view toward expanding or contracting union organizing rights.
NLRB Provides Guidelines for Determining Supervisory Status Under NLRA.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued a trilogy of decisions providing long-awaited guidance for determining whether an individual is a supervisor under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). See Oakwood Healthcare, Inc., 348 N.L.R.B. No. 37 (Sept . 29, 2006) (3-2); Golden Crest Health Care Center, 348 NLRB No. 39 (Sept. 29, 2006); Croft Metals Inc., 348 NLRB No. 38 (Sept. 29, 2006). In Oakwood Healthcare, the Board defined the terms independent judgment, assign, and responsibly direct as those terms are used in the NLRAs definition of supervisor. The Board revised its definition of the term independent judgment in light of the U.S. Supreme Courts 2001 decision that the Board had defined that term too narrowly. See NLRB v. Kentucky River Community Care, 532 U.S. 706 (2001).
Court Directs NLRB to Explain the Reasons for its Determination Regarding University Faculty.
In a significant victory for their client, Ford & Harrison attorneys Arnold Perl and Kathryn Pascover recently convinced the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) failed to adequately explain its determination that faculty members of an academic institution are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). See Point Park University v. NLRB (August 1, 2006). Accordingly, the court remanded the case to the Board so that it can either explain its decision as required by applicable law or reconsider its determination.
