In Loparex v. NLRB,, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld the NLRB’s decision that Loperex had engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of the NLRA. The decision is a reminder that Section 8(a)(1) offers employees broad protection from employers’ attempts “to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise” of their statutory rights to organize. 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1); 29 U.S.C. § 157. More after the break.
Archive for the ‘NLRB’ Category
A Reminder About Union Organizing Activity
Monday, February 1st, 2010Discipline For Use Of Email May Constitute Unfair Labor Practice, D.C. Circuit Holds
Monday, November 23rd, 2009In Guard Publishing Company v. NLRB, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices when it disciplined an employee for sending union-related e‑mail messages on the company’s e-mail system. More after the break.
NLRB Nominations Clear Committee
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009Workplace Prof Blog has an update here on the three NLRB nominations that were voted out of Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (“HELP”) Committee. The NLRB issued a press release. Editorial commentary courtesy of the Washington Times here.
Contributed by Eric A. Welter.Is ObamaCare A Trojan Horse For Forced Unionization?
Thursday, September 10th, 2009That is the opinion of the President of the National Right to Work Committee. His catch line is “ObamaCare is a Trojan Horse for more forced unionization.” His opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal can be found here.
Contributed by Eric A. Welter.4th Circuit Affirms Injunction Requiring Offers Of Employment To Union Workers
Monday, July 6th, 2009In Gary Muffley v. Spartan Mining Company, et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed an order of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia requiring the defendant employer to offer employment to persons it refused to hire because of union affiliation while denying additional injunctive relief sought by the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). More after the break.
D.C. Circuit Denies Enforcement Of NLRB Order For Lack Of Quorum
Monday, May 4th, 2009The WSJ Blog has a post today here on a ruling by the D.C. Circuit last Friday refusing to enforce a decision by the NLRB on the ground that the two-member Board did not constitute a “quorum” and therefore lacked legal authority to act. Although nominees by the Obama administration are pending, the ruling throws a host of rulings by the Board over the last 16 months (“hundreds”) into question.
Despite ruling that the NLRB lacked authority to issue its ruling, the case was not a complete victory for the employer — the D.C. Circuit remanded the case in question to the NLRB for consideration once a quorum was present.
Contributed by Eric A. Welter.Profane Remark About Employer Results In Forfeit Of Labor Protections
Monday, April 20th, 2009In Media General Operations, Inc. v. NLRB, the Fourth Circuit found that an employee’s profane remark about his employer caused him to forfeit the protection of the National Labor Relations Act’s prohibition against retaliation for engaging in a protected activity. More after the break.
The Stark Reality Of Unionization
Thursday, March 19th, 2009The Greenbrier Resort has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. As noted in a post today at the VLW Blog here, the primary reason for the bankruptcy filing was the refusal of the nine unions representing the vast majority of the Resort’s workforce to renegotiate their labor agreements in the face of the recession and woes in the luxury resort industry. More after the break.
Contributed by Eric A. Welter.Employee (No) Choice Act Introduced in House and Senate
Wednesday, March 11th, 2009The Employee (No) Free Choice Act of 2009 was introduced yesterday in the House and Senate. We posted on the EFCA yesterday here — The Death of Secret Ballot Elections in the Workplace. More after the break.
The Death of Secret Ballot Elections in the Workplace
Tuesday, March 10th, 2009According to the OpenCongress blog (here), the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) is expected to be introduced in the House and Senate today. Unfortunately, there is nothing “free” about the EFCA, which would put an end to secret ballot elections for union representation in the workplace. More after the break.
Prepare Now For The Employee Free Choice Act
Tuesday, December 23rd, 2008A column in the December 2008 issue of HR Magazine caught out attention recently. The article was entitled “Get Prepared for New Employee Free Choice Act.” As noted in other posts (here) the EFCA may become law after the new administration takes over in 2009. If this does take place, the EFCA will dramatically change the union recognition process. More after the break.
Recent Labor Law Decisions On Withdrawal Of Union Recognition
Thursday, July 31st, 2008Workplace Prof Blog has two posts on recent decisions involving labor law of interest to employers in Virginia. The first discusses the denial of the NLRB’s request for a 10(j) injunction by the Eastern District of Virginia. The second discusses a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upholding the withdrawal of recognition of a union by an employer. The 10(j) injunction case also involves withdrawal of recognition.
4th Circuit Grants Enforcement To NLRB In Connection With Union Election
Friday, December 7th, 2007The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an unpublished decision today granting enforcement to the NLRB of its decision that an employer committed four unfair labor practices in connection with a union organizing campaign. The case is SNE v. NLRB, No. 06-1881 (4th Cir. 12/7/2007). The case is a brief tutorial on several things that an employer should not do during a union organizing campaign, including deciding to withdraw a decision to increase wages because of the union campaign, selective enforcement of a no-solicitation rule, unreasonably restricting an employee from discussing the terms and conditions of their employment, and discharging an employee for testifying in a Board proceeding.
