Skip to main content

Updated: Texas Judge Blocks Implementation of Dept. of Labor's "Persuader Rule"


Back in April, I had noted that the Department of Labor issued a publication of the new "Persuader Rule".  That rule would require extensive disclosures from employers or consultants to report any arrangement to persuade employees in regard to the right to organize or collectively bargain.  Many in the labor field were taken aback by the far reaching impact this new rule would have.  

At the time, I pointed out that several cases had been filed to contest the Persuader Rule.  Earlier this week, a federal judge in the Northern District of Texas issued a nationwide injunction that blocks the implementation of the Persuader Rule...for the time being.  In the order, the Court wrote that the National Federation of Independent Business (among other plaintiffs) that had filed suit to challenge the rule were likely to succeed on their claims that the Department of Labor exceeded its authority and promulgated a rule that was arbitrary, vague, and violated federal law and the Constitution.  

The Court further held that the plaintiffs were likely to suffer irreparable harm if the Persuader Rule went into effect, as planned, and that a nationwide injunction was necessary because the plaintiffs (and intervenors) consisted of multiple states along with business groups with members in all fifty states.

Interesting to note that earlier this month, however, a federal court in Minnesota that heard a similar challenge declined to grant an injunction to block implementation of the Persuader Rule.  It appears these plaintiffs in the Texas case have had better luck on the issue...so far.  Of course, the dual outcome of the issue could result in the issue working its way through the courts of appeals and ultimately all the way up to the United States Supreme Court.



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,...

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

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. ...