Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week: Labor Law Edition


Every week, I read a wide variety of cases, articles, blogs, and opinions on employment and labor law issues from around the country.  This week, however, I found a few intriguing articles on labor law topics that really jumped out at me.  As a result, the highlights of my readings this week center on labor law issues.



NLRB Rules Confidentiality Policy is Overbroad

The NLRB recently held that an employer's confidentiality policy which prohibited employees from disclosing confidential information, such as "personal or financial information, etc." illegally restricted the employees' right to engage in protected concerted activity.  Employers that utilize confidentiality policies should ensure they are narrowly drawn or risk litigation over potentially overbroad policies.


Proposed New Union Election Rules = More Unions Likely to Form?

The NLRB has proposed new rules in regard to when employees vote on whether or not to organize a union.  Under the current rules, the median time between the filing of a representation petition by employees, and the NLRB holding an election in a contested organizing campaign, is around 59 days.  The NLRB’s proposed rules would cut that time by more than half, to a very, very quick 25 days or less.  

Employers need to prepare for these changes, should they come into effect, by ensuring their workers and management are well versed on the company's position on unions.  While these proposed rules are not in effect yet, employers need to remain pro-active on this potential change and prepare for a much quicker turn around time on when a vote would occur on unions.


Water Cooler Gossip: The NLRB Says, Gossip Away, Employees

This article addresses Alurus Technical Institute & Joslyn Henderson, a case in which an administrative law judge of the NLRB held that a company’s “No Gossip Policy” violated the National Labor Relations Act.  In essence, the company instituted a policy that “Employees that participate in or instigate gossip about the company, an employee, or customer will receive disciplinary action” in an attempt to slow down a rumor mill in a particular department of the company.  The policy defined “gossip” to include, among other things “talking about a person’s personal life when they are not present,” “talking about a person’s professional life without his/her supervisor present,” and “negative, or untrue, or disparaging comments or criticisms of another person or persons.”  The policy was cited later as one of the reasons for an employee’s termination (although the employer later took the position that it was actually the employee’s solicitation of other employees to work for a competitor that precipitated the firing).

The NLRB held that such a broad “No Gossip” policy was a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because it prohibited employees from speaking to coworkers about discipline and other terms and conditions of employment.

Comments

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,...

Senator Bernie Sanders To Introduce Bill Requiring Large Corporations To Pay For Federal Assistance Programs

Next week, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is set to introduce legislation which would require large employers such as Walmart, Amazon, and McDonald's to fully cover the cost of food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and other federal assistance programs that their employees receive.  Senator Sanders has stated that the goal is to force these large employers to pay their employees a living wage and cut back on the nearly $150 billion in taxpayer dollars that go toward funding these federal programs every year. As for the specifics, a 100% tax on government benefits received would be imposed on government benefits received by workers at companies with 500 or more employees.  For instance, if a Walmart employee received $500 in food stamps, Walmart would be taxed $500. To call this proposed legislation groundbreaking would be an understatement.  I would expect that Senator Sanders, an Independent that caucuses with Democrats, is going to face an uphill battle gett...

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