NLRB

On August 25, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board issued its decision in Cemex Construction Materials Pacific LLC (N.L.R.B., Case 28-CA-230115) – upending over fifty years of established law and setting forth a new, union-friendly framework for determining when employers are required to recognize and bargain with unions without a representation election. … Continue Reading

On Wednesday, August 2, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (“the Board”) continued its retreat from many of the decisions issued by its Trump-era iteration.  In Stericycle, Inc, 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023), the Board abandoned its decision in Boeing Co., 365 NLRB No. 154 (2017), which had announced a new business-friendly test for workplace rules, in favor of a framework derived by the Obama Board from Lutheran Heritage Village-Livonia, 343 NLRB No.… Continue Reading

Last week, the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) issued a decision changing the legal standard it will use to determine whether workers are “employees” covered by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), or independent contractors who are not.

Prior to 2019, the Board’s test for determining whether a worker was a statutory employee or independent contractor weighed a variety of factors, including those outlined in the Restatement (Second) of Agency:

(a) the extent of control which, by the agreement, the employer may exercise over the details of the work;

(b) whether or not the one employed is engaged in a distinct occupation or business;

(c) the kind of occupation, with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under the direction of the employer or by a specialist without supervision;

d) the skill required in the particular occupation;

e) whether the employer or the worker supplies the instrumentalities, tools, and the place of work for the person doing the work;

(f) the length of time for which the person is employed;

(g) the method of payment, whether by the time or by the job;

(h) whether or not the work is a part of the regular business of the employer;

(i) whether or not the parties believe they are creating the relation of employer and employee; and

(j) whether the principal is or is not in business.… Continue Reading

Last month, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that an employer violates Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act) when the employer offers employee severance agreements with provisions restricting employees’ Section 7 rights under the Act, such as with overly broad confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions.  McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No.… Continue Reading

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that an employer violates Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act when the employer uses employee severance agreements with provisions restricting employees’ exercise of their NLRA rights. In McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (Feb. 21, 2023), the Board reversed its prior decisions in Baylor University Medical Center, 369 NLRB No.… Continue Reading

In a divided decision handed down yesterday, January 17, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit partially affirmed the decision of a federal District Court eliminating, in part, aspects of an employer-friendly 2019 Rule put in place by the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) to “ensure fair and accurate voting, transparency, uniformity, certainty and finality, and efficiency” in the union election process by, in effect, slowing some of the Obama-era NLRB’s “quickie election” procedures.  … Continue Reading

For the second time in less than a week, the National Labor Relations Board has thrown out a Trump-era standard and reinstated Obama-era rules favorable to labor unions. In Bexar County Performing Arts Center Foundation, 16-CA-193636 (“Bexar County II“), the Board restricted a business owner’s ability to prohibit off-duty contract workers from conducting labor protests on its property.… Continue Reading

Employers that violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) will have to pay workers additional damages under a recently issued precedential decision from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board). 

In Thryv, Inc., the NLRB ruled 3-2 that the Board’s standard remedy for make-whole relief should include consequential damages.  The Board now will “expressly order that the respondent compensate affected employees for all direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms suffered as a result of the respondent’s unfair labor practice” to more fully realize the concept of “make-whole relief” under Section 10(c) of the NLRA. … Continue Reading

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”)  has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) inviting public comment on a proposed rule that would rescind and replace an April 2020 rule which currently governs: 1) the filing and processing of petitions for a Board-conducted representation election while unfair labor practice charges are pending; and 2) the filing and processing of petitions following an employer’s voluntary recognition of a union as the majority-supported collective bargaining representative.… Continue Reading

Yesterday, the NLRB published a proposed rule designed to rescind and replace the Trump-era rule used to determine whether two companies are joint employers under the NLRA. Under the rule adopted during the Trump Administration, an employer can be a joint employer with another entity if it has substantial direct and immediate control over the essential terms and conditions of employment of the other entity’s workers.… Continue Reading