Litigation News & Updates

On February 2, 2018, a split three-member Board panel held that a prior election won by a union must be vacated and, accordingly, ordered a second election as it found merit to the employer’s objection arguing that the tardiness of the Board Agent conducting the election potentially disenfranchised a dispositive number of eligible voters.

In

On January 29, 2018, the DC Circuit remanded a 2016 NLRB decision – Grill Concepts Servs., Inc., 364 NLRB No. 36 (2016) back to the Board for reconsideration of several employee handbook violations found unlawful under the now-replaced Lutheran Heritage standard in light of the Board’s new standard recognized in Boeing Co.

Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors – the recent Board case overturning Browning Ferris Industries and restoring the previous joint employer standard – was perhaps the most important decision among the many decided prior to former Board Chairman Miscimarra stepping down in late 2017; but the decision may not be as significant for all.

As explained in an

A recent Memorandum from Peter B. Robb, the NLRB’s newly installed General Counsel, reminded me of a stanza from Lewis Carroll’s The Walrus and The Carpenter. To paraphrase: “The time has come” the GC said, “To talk of many things: Of handbook rules and Weingarten, of email use and salt-ings.” Though perhaps not

The Obama Board did not pull any punches when it came to analyzing the lawfulness of workplace rules. Still, as previously blogged about here, a more balanced approach to workplace rules may – hopefully – be on the horizon. On October 19, 2017, the ALJ in Green Apple Supermarket of Jamaica, Inc., issued

The Ninth Circuit, a historically employee-friendly court, recently issued a decision that backs the NLRB’s revised post-arbitral deferral standard laid out in its December 15, 2014 Babcock & Wilcox decision. This Board decision was previously blogged about here. On Tuesday, October 17, 2017, the Court affirmed the Board’s decision to apply its new

Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether employment agreements that require an employee to resolve a dispute with her employer through individual arbitration and waive the option of having the dispute handled collectively is unlawful.

In D. R. Horton, 357 NLRB No. 184 (2012), the NLRB first held that

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) has taken a jaundiced view of employer policies that require respect and civility in the workplace over the past several years. The Board has found such rules generally interfere with employees Section 7 rights and thereby violate Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (“the Act”).

The issue of joint employer has been frequently discussed in the labor & employment law circles, and even the media, since the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “the Board”) issued its 2015 decision in Browning-Ferris Industries, 362 NLRB No. 186 (2015). The issue has had so much attention that a bill, H.R.

Racist comments, similar to other forms of employee misconduct (e.g., workplace violence or theft), usually result in termination. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows this. The National Labor Relations Board, however, upheld an Administrative Law Judge’s prior decision declining to follow an arbitrator’s ruling and ordered Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.