Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


During the past few weeks, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has been quite busy, issuing several prominent decisions that favor employers.  With Board Member Lauren McFerran’s term ending this Monday, that leaves the NLRB with only three (Republican appointed) Board Members, out of five total Board Member positions.  (Readers will recall that three Board Member positions are traditionally comprised of Board Members appointed by the political party in power while the remaining two Board Member positions go to the minority party.  In this case, Republicans are currently the majority party; Democrats being the minority party.)  

With President Donald Trump not appearing eager to appoint a Democrat to the two vacant seats (and with Congress likely focused on an upcoming impeachment trial next year), I would expect for the foreseeable future that the decisions issued by the NLRB will continue to use to favor employers.  Of course, even if either open Board Member position was filled by a Democratic appointment, there would still be a 3 - 2 majority in favor of Republican appointed (and traditionally employer friendly) Board Members.

As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.


Tentative Labor Deal Saves Last Night's Democratic Debate

Some readers might have been following news reports the past few days in which a labor strike by food workers at Loyola Marymount University threatened the most recent Democratic debate.  (The debate took place at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.)  The seven Democratic candidates for President that participated in the debate last night all stated that if the strike was not resolved prior to the debate, they would not cross the picket line (and therefore there would not be a debate.)  As The Wall Street Journal reported, a tentative contract was agreed upon prior earlier in the week, such that the debate took place as originally planned (and as a result, we were lucky enough to hear Senator Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg talk about political fundraisers in wine caves.) This was a potential crisis averted, thanks to the last minute bargaining.


Sacramento Restaurants Struggle to Manage Minimum Wage Hikes

Breck Dumas at The Blaze wrote an article recently in which he made note of several long standing Sacramento restaurants that are struggling to manage rising labor costs, given the impending minimum wage hike in the state.  Starting January 1st of 2020, minimum wage rates in the state will rise to $13/hour for employers with 26 or more workers and $12/hour for employers with fewer than 26 workers.  Come 2023, the statewide minimum wage rate will be $15/hour.  As a result of these rising labor costs, many long standing restaurants in the city such as Fat City Bar, Opa! Opa!, and Perry's have chosen to shutter their businesses, unable to afford to pay their workers.  It is no secret that rising minimum wage rates have benefited many workers but have often resulted in an unbearable burden being placed on employers (oftentimes smaller employers.)  As we have seen, some employers scale back their staff, cut hours, or pass the increase in labor costs onto customers (via an increase in prices) in order to make ends meet, while others make the difficult choice of closing.  Unfortunately, while minimum wage increases have benefited some, they have proven detrimental to others.


First Bargaining Session Between Harvard Graduate Students and Harvard Takes Place

Readers will recall that Harvard graduate students went on strike in recent weeks, after not being able to agree on a new collective bargaining agreement with Harvard.  While prior negotiations had resulted in some progress, the United Automobile Workers (the union representing the graduate students), had authority to strike after more than 90% of the voting members authorized a strike back in October.  The union was dissatisfied with the perceived slow negotiations over key topics such as pay, healthcare, and grievance procedures.  However, there might be some hints of progress here as this past Wednesday, the parties took part in the first bargaining session since the strike began.  Now I will caution that while this does not mean an agreement will be reached or the strike will end shortly, there is some reason for optimism that a new collective bargaining agreement could be reached after further negotiation among the parties.


NLRB Releases Host of Employer Friendly Decisions

In recent days, the NLRB has been busy, releasing several decisions which reverse decisions previously issued by the NLRB during President Barack Obama’s time in office.  This article from The National Law Review does a good job breaking things down, but I will call attention in particular to two decisions:  In Caesars Entertainment, the NLRB held that employers can prohibit employees from using their work e-mail for personal reasons (including union related activity) which is a reversal of a decision from Purple Communications; as well, in Apogee Retail, the NLRB reversed a decision from Banner Health System and held that employers do not automatically violate the National Labor Relations Act when employees are prohibited from discussing confidential workplace investigations, so long as the confidentiality directive is limited to the time period in which the investigation is pending.

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, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more