Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: FDRLST Media, LLC (NLRB)


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.


In April, an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) issued a ruling in FDRLST Media, LLC which addressed whether an executive of a company that sent out a threatening tweet aimed at the company’s employees violated the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).

In the case, Ben Domenech (“Domenech”) serves as the Executive Officer of FDRLST Media, LLC (“FDRLST”).  Domenech sent out a tweet in response to a story about workers at another company staging a walkout.  In his tweet, Domenech stated “FYI: @fdrlst first one of you tries to unionize I swear I’ll send you back to the salt mine.”  Unsurprisingly, an unfair labor practice charge followed, alleging this tweet violated Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA.

As readers are likely aware, Section 7 of the NLRA provides that “employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations...”  Section 8(a)(1) provides it is an unfair labor practice to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights under the NLRA.  The test for whether Section 8(a)(1) has been violated is “whether the statements or conduct have a reasonable tendency to interfere with, restrain, or coerce union or protected activities.”  Of note, the test for interference, restraint, or coercion dos not turn on the employer’s motive or whether the coercion succeeded or failed.  

In the decision, ALJ held that Domenech’s tweet violated the NLRA, because the threat (even if made in a joking manner) could violate the NLRA.  Relying upon precedent, the ALJ pointed out that a reasonable interpretation of the tweet could be that working conditions would worsen or employee benefits would be jeopardized if a union were formed.  Interestingly, the ALJ disregarded two affidavits that FDRLST produced from two employees that stated they found the tween satirical and comedic in nature.

Never fear though, FDRLST has filed a motion with the NLRB asking them to review (and overturn) the ALJ’s decision.  That motion was only filed on June 19th, so I suspect it will be some time before we know what the NLRB will do here.  But in the meantime, employers (and supervisors), be careful what you post on social media or put in a text.  As the ALJ’s decision recognizes, even if a tweet is meant to be a joke, that does not mean there is no potential violation of the NLRA.


For a copy of the ALJ’s decision:  https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45830af141

For a copy of FDRLST’s motion filed with the NLRB:  

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