Franczek Radelet P.C • November 24, 2015
In its 2011 Specialty Healthcare decision, the National Labor Relations Board revised the test it applies in determining whether a union’s petitioned-for unit is appropriate. In Specialty Healthcare, the NLRB explained that where a union’s petitioned-for unit is readily identifiable as a group and shares a community of interest (common terms and conditions of employment), an employer who seeks a larger unit must demonstrate an “overwhelming” community of interest between the included and excluded employees. As we have reported in the April 2013 FR Alert and July 2014 FR Alert, employers have struggled to meet the “overwhelming” community of interest standard.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • November 19, 2015
The National Labor Relations Board granted yesterday the United Auto Workers’ petition for a union election at the Volkswagen facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The election will be in a “micro-unit” of skilled tradesmen at the plant and will take place on December 3-4, only two weeks from now.
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.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • November 17, 2015
In Green JobWorks LLC/ACECO, LLC, No. 05-RC-154596 (Oct. 21, 2015), discussed here, a case believed to be the first post-Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 186 (Aug. 27, 2015), to apply the new joint employer “test” articulated there, a National Labor Relations Board Regional Director found that a subcontractor and temporary staffing agency were not joint employers. Now, the petitioning union, disappointed by the ruling, has requested NLRB review of that decision.
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.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • November 06, 2015
Employee walkouts and protests are likely to occur on a massive scale across the country on Tuesday, November 10, spurred on by the union-supported “Fight for $15” movement. Low-wage workers seeking higher pay and possible union status will be the primary participants, but don’t be fooled into thinking the protests will be limited to fast-food workers. It is expected that these protests will include workers across many sectors.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • November 04, 2015
An NLRB case involving the construction industry provides insight into how the agency’s new joint employer standard may be applied.
Ogletree Deakins • November 02, 2015
The 2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that an employee’s “like” of a posting by a former employee, and a second employee’s comment on the original posting both were protected activity, and that firing those two employees violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Three D, LLC v. NLRB, No. 14-3284 (2d. Cir. Summary Order Oct. 21, 2015).
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • October 30, 2015
Obscenities alone—even when viewed by an employer's customers—do not deprive employees engaged in protected concerted activity of the National Labor Relations Act's ("NLRA" or the "Act") protections. So held the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit when recently affirming the National Labor Relations Board's ("NLRB" or "the Board") decision in Three D, LLC (Triple Play), 361 NLRB No. 31 (2014). The court also affirmed the Board's decision to require an employer to meet a high standard of proof to justify terminating employees who make critical, and even false, statements about the employer while engaging in Section 7 activity in social media. Consequently, Triple Play has broadened employees' ability to use social media to complain about work with impunity.
Constangy, Brooks, Smith & Prophete, LLP • October 29, 2015
Back to the Past at VW Chattanooga?