Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: House Bill 53 (Ohio)


As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


Last month, Ohio Representatives John Becker and Craig Riedel introduced House Bill 53 in the Ohio Legislature which seeks to make Ohio the next right to work state.  As a refresher, this type of right to work bill would prohibit public employee unions from requiring union membership or membership fees (also called agency fees, which are what non-union members pay to receive the collective bargaining benefits of the union).  Representative Becker pointed out that passage of House Bill 53 would "align Ohio law to federal case law."  (He is referring to the Supreme Court case from this past summer, Janus v. AFSCME.  Readers will likely recall the importance of that case).  Representative Riedel has argued that allowing an individual to be terminated because they chose not to be a part of the union is "unfair" and produces an inequitable result for workers in the state.

At one of the initial hearings on the bill, labor unions and their supporters made their opposition known.  One of the key arguments against making Ohio the 29th right to work state has revolved around the idea that a right to work bill would limit a union's resources which would consequently limit workers' access to benefits.

As some have pointed out, outgoing Ohio Governor John Kasich has not made right to work a priority during his time in office.  Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately, depending how you view right to work), incoming Governor Mike DeWine also has indicated he does not view right to work as a priority.  For the time being, while House Bill 53 might garner headlines, there does not appear to be widespread optimism that it will secure passage anytime soon.


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