The NLRB Limits Employers’ Ability to Discipline Employees for Harassing, Abusive, Racially Offensive Conduct Occurring Amidst Protected Activity
Articles Discussing Protected Concerted Activity Under The NLRA.
On May 1, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a decision in Lion Elastomers LLC II that changes the standards relating to discipline or discharge of workers who cross the line with offensive or abusive conduct while engaging in activity protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Last week, on March 22, 2023, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Jennifer Abruzzo, released Memorandum
In McLaren Macomb, the NLRB overturned two decisions that had permitted employers to include confidentiality and nondisparagement provisions in severance agreements. “Mere proffer” of a severance agreement that conditions receipt of benefits on the “forfeiture of statutory rights” violates the NLRA. This Insight includes key takeaways from the
Executive Summary: The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) recently overruled two prior Board decisions and held that overly broad language in non-disparagement and confidentiality clauses included in severance agreements provided to eleven bargaining unit employees violated the employees’ Section 7 rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
On February 21, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued an important decision that may fundamentally change how and when employers use confidentiality and nondisparagement provisions.
In another ruling promoting a pro-labor agenda under the Biden administration, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) reverted to its pre-2019 precedent on the balance between the rights of property owners and the rights of employees under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
On August 29, 2022, in a 3-2 decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) reaffirmed that when an employer interferes in any way with its employees’ right to display union insignia, the employer must prove special circumstances that justify its interference. See Tesla, Inc., 32-CA-197020, 371 NLRB 131 (2022). In reaching this decision, the Board overruled a 2019 decision in which it held that the “special circumstances” standard only applied to employer policies that prohibited—rather than restricted—an employee from displaying union insignia.
On August 29, 2022, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a decision finding that absent special circumstances, employers may not enforce dress codes or uniform policies that interfere with employees’ right to display union insignia. 371 NLRB No. 131 (Aug. 29, 2022). The NLRB’s decision is a return to
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Acting General Counsel Peter Sung Ohr (AGC) has announced in a memorandum that his office will return to “vigorous enforcement” of employee rights under Section 7 rights of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
On March 31, 2021, Acting General Counsel Peter Ohr issued a memorandum addressing the concept of “concerted activity.” As brief background, under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the right to engage in “concerted” activities for the purpose of “mutual aid or protection.”
What constitutes “concerted”
Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), in a split decision 2-1, approved a California-based ambulance company’s implementation of a social media policy that prohibited employees from “inappropriate communications” related to the company. The NLRB’s ruling reversed a decision by an administrative law judge, back in October 2019, that concluded
Employees have a broad legal right to communicate with one another about wages, benefits, and other employment terms. To effectuate this broad right, the National Labor Relations Board has required employers to exclude such information from their confidentiality policies. In The Boeing Co.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a supplemental decision on May 20, 2020, finding lawful a policy prohibiting employees from possessing or using their cell phones on the manufacturing floor or at their workstations.
On March 25, 2020, a National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) emphasized the broad reach of Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”) in non-union settings. Ground Zero Foundation d/b/a Academy for Creative Enrichment, Case 4-CA-245956. Charging Party was hired as a summer camp counselor, but