The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) modified its standard for determining whether an employer may lawfully discipline an employee for abusive or offensive statements and conduct in the context of activity otherwise protected under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Articles Discussing Labor Law At The Federal Level, Including Issues Under The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that Browning-Ferris Industries is not a joint employer of employees of one of its contractors. Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 369 NLRB No. 139 (July 29, 2020) (B-F II).
The NLRB held that the Obama-era NLRB’s 2015 decision that overruled 30 years
On July 21, 2020, the National Labor Relations Board issued its decision in General Motors LLC, 369 NLRB No. 127 (2020), overruling decades of precedent granting employees considerable freedom to engage in abusive or offensive conduct in connection with union or other protected concerted activity.
The National Labor Relations Board has just proposed new union election rules that would reduce the information employers must provide to unions prior to elections and allowing absentee voting by workers on military leave. This is the third rule the Board has proposed during the Trump administration impacting elections of bargaining representatives. What do employers need to know about this proposal?
The early evidence is in, and the results are clear. National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Regional Directors decidedly have not embraced the General Counsel’s (GC) guidelines on conducting manual ballot (in-person) elections during the COVID-19 pandemic. Memorandum GC 20-10 “Suggested Manual Election Protocols” (July 6, 2020). For more on the
Continuing its reshaping of its election rules, policies, and procedures, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has proposed two new amendments to the policies and procedures governing its elections. The changes will be published on July 29, 2020, in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register.
Employees have rights to certain protected activities under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Employers cannot interfere with these rights. But what happens when an employee’s conduct during a protected activity becomes abusive? In its July 21 decision, the National Labor Relations Board acknowledged an employer’s right to discipline employees despite protected activity if the employer shows it would have disciplined the employee in the absence of the protected activity.
The Senate plans to vote during the last week in July on the nomination of Lauren McFerran to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), according to Employment Law360.
Currently, the five-member NLRB has two vacancies. McFerran, a Democrat, served on the NLRB from December 17, 2014, to December 16, 2019.
During a pandemic, protests, and a polarized election season, employers have walked an ever-increasingly fine line between protecting employee speech in the workplace and enforcing rules on workplace conduct. That conflict is no more evident than the line of cases under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently made several important announcements that impact employers. It released a batch of advice memos detailing advisory attorneys’ answers to discrete COVID-19-related questions raised by field officials. It also ruled on employer rights to search employee property.
Executive Summary: On July 21, 2020, in a unanimous decision, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) modified the standard for determining whether employees have been lawfully disciplined or discharged after making abusive or offensive statements in the course of activity otherwise protected under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA” or the “Act”). See General Motors LLC, 14-CA-197985, 369 NLRB No. 127 (2020). In reaching this decision, the Board announced that all such cases moving forward would be analyzed under the Wright Line standard.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel (GC) has weighed in on several COVID-19-related issues under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The AFL-CIO has sued the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to stop implementation of changes to NLRB representation case procedures involving its blocking charge policy, the voluntary recognition bar doctrine, and its rule regarding National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) Section 9(a) recognition in the construction industry.