Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


A few good updates were on my radar this week, namely dealing with the right to work legislation working its way through the Missouri Legislature, the Secretary of Labor nominee's delayed hearing, as well as a development on the Harvard student unionization vote.  As a result, I want to keep this update concise and to the point and give readers a bit more information on two major developments on the labor and employment law front from across the country this week.

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


With Missouri's Right to Work Bill a Near Certainty, Both Sides Gear Up For the Next Fight

Never let it be said that supporters and opponents of certain pieces of legislation are not forward thinking.  Celeste Blott over at The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote an article earlier this week about AFL-CIO President Mike Louis having recently filed petitions for the 2018 ballot that would seek to reverse any right to work legislation that is passed this year.  Not to be outdone, a Missouri nurse and two Kansas City police officers have challenged the petitions on the grounds that they are "insufficient and unfair" and are asking the court to rewrite them with more details about unions, collective bargaining agreements, and the right to work law they would supersede.  Even though Missouri is not a right to work state yet, it appears that both supporters and opponents of the legislation are already planning their next step.


Secretary of Labor's Confirmation Hearing Delayed Again

Earlier this morning, The Boston Globe reported that the confirmation hearing for Andy Puzder, President Trump's nominee for Secretary of Labor, has again been pushed back.  Readers might recall that Puzder's confirmation hearing was originally set for January 12, January 17, and February 2.  As of this writing, Puzder's new confirmation hearing date is now set for February 7.  Several 'pro labor' groups have been outspoken in recent weeks against Puzder and have argued that he is ill suited to become the next Labor Secretary because of his prior history which has tended to be 'pro employer'.  While the Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee (who will hold the confirmation hearings) says the additional delay is so that Puzder can submit required paperwork for review by the Senators beforehand, perhaps there is a more striking reason why Puzder has continued to delay getting this paperwork submitted?  I am not necessarily saying that Puzder is having second thoughts about the position, as mentioned before, but with so many delays in the confirmation hearing, maybe where there is smoke, there is also fire...


Harvard Takes Steps to Dismiss Objection to Unionization Election

Last week, Harvard moved to dismiss objections to the student unionization election that happened recently.  Readers will likely recall the drawn out process that has occurred since the election occurred.  At issue in this matter is a dispute over whether the list of eligible voters in the election, generated by Harvard, improperly excluded some employees who otherwise were qualified to participate.  In its motion to dismiss this particular objection, Harvard argues it properly compiled the list and took steps to ensure that all eligible students were included on the list.  According to the note from The Harvard Crimson, a decision is expected prior to February 21.

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

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

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