Skip to main content

NLRB: Employers Cannot Require Disclaimer to Accompany Social Media Posts By Employees


The Kroger Company of Michigan - NLRB

Facts:  Anita Granger filed an unfair labor practice charge against Kroger on February 15, 2013, in regard to the social media disclaimer that Kroger required its employees to post whenever an employee posted something online.  Specifically, Kroger stated that in its handbook that if employees identified themselves as an associate of the company or published any work related information online, the following disclaimer had to be included:  "The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent the positions, strategies, or opinions of The Kroger Co. family of stores."

The issue in this case centers on whether the disclaimer requirement violated the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), specifically Section 7.  Section 7 states:

  • "Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any and all such activities."

A key protection provided by Section 7 is the fact that employees have the right to discuss, debate, and communicate with each other regarding their workplace terms and conditions.
 
Holding:  The NLRB Administrative Law Judge held the disclaimer language included in Kroger's handbook was illegal, in violation of Section 7 of the NLRA.  Specifically, the Judge noted that where the rules are likely to have a chilling effect on Section 7 rights, the Board may conclude that their maintenance is an unfair labor practice.

In this case, the Judge held that even if Kroger had a legitimate interest in limiting unauthorized communication, the disclaimer requirement had no significant legitimate justification, and in effect would chill Section 7 speech.  As a result, the disclaimer requirement imposed on Kroger's employees was found to be illegal and therefore was an unfair labor practice.

Date:  April 22, 2014

Opinion:  http://www.nlrb.gov/case/07-CA-098566

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum,...
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more