Skip to main content

NLRB Counsel Concludes Google Did Not Violate the NLRA in Termination of Employee


Late last week, an Associate General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") concluded that Google did not violate federal labor law when it terminated an employee after he circulated an internal memorandum that suggested women were not as biologically suited for coding jobs as men.

The employee, James Damore ("Damore"), worked at Google and was terminated shortly after he circulated the internal memorandum that both criticized his employer and also made statements about women in the workplace.  Following his termination, Damore filed a complaint with the NLRB and argued that Google violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") on the grounds that he was unlawfully terminated for engaging in protected activity.  However, the Associate General Counsel disagreed and held that although Damore's memorandum contained protected statements (in regard to his criticism of Google), he was ultimately terminated for statements that were unprotected by the NLRA.  Namely, Damore's comments about women in his memorandum were found to be "discriminatory and constituted sexual harassment, notwithstanding effort[s] to cloak comments with 'scientific' references and analysis, and notwithstanding 'not all women' disclaimers.  Moreover, those statements were likely to cause serious dissension and disruption in the workplace."  Ultimately, the Associate General Counsel recommends dismissing Damore's complaint had it not been withdrawn.

However, last month, Damore chose to drop his NLRB complaint and instead has filed a class action that he and another former Google employee have brought against the company on the grounds that Google discriminates against white, male, and conservative employees.


For a copy of the Associate General Counsel's Memorandum:  https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45826e6391


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