Skip to main content

NLRB: Employer Not Entitled to In Person, Rather Than Remote Hearing

 

William Beaumont Hospital - NLRB


Facts:  William Beaumont Hospital (“WB”) faced several allegations of committing unfair labor practices in relation to a union organizing campaign.  An Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied WB’s request to hold an in person hearing on the grounds that the coronavirus pandemic constituted “compelling circumstances” to warrant the hearing be held remotely via video technology.  WB filed an instant request with the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) asking for permission to appeal the ALJ’s ruling.

Analysis:  The NLRB noted that in a prior decision from earlier this year, Morrison Healthcare, it had found the coronavirus pandemic to constitute “compelling circumstances” to warrant a remote hearing in a representation case.  In reaching this conclusion, the NLRB based its ruling on Section 102.35(c) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations.  (Section 102.35(c) allows a witness to appear and testify via video in an unfair labor practice case.)  In Morrison, the NLRB applied Section 102.35(c) to allow videoconference hearings “on a showing of good cause based on compelling circumstances and under appropriate safeguards.

The NLRB recognized that while Section 102.38 provides that “[a]ny party has the right to appear at the hearing in person, by counsel, or by other representative...”, the right to appear in person is the right to appear at a hearing at all, not the right to be physically present in the hearing room.  Consequently, the NLRB found nothing in the Board’s Rules and Regulations or the National Labor Relations Act that would prevent the ALJ from allowing the unfair labor practice hearing to take place remotely via video technology rather than in person.

The Takeaway:  This decision is a good example of the phrase “it depends.”  For instance, had the ALJ allowed an in person hearing, I think the NLRB would have deferred to that ruling and allowed it to occur in person rather than remotely.  As well, had there been a larger number of cases where in person hearings had recently been held, I think WB could have argued there was a strong precedent to begin holding in person hearings again.  Not to mention, had the ALJ or NLRB held that the coronavirus pandemic had sufficiently subsided (enough to start widespread in person hearings that is), I think WB again would have come out on top.  Unfortunately, the cards were stacked against WB here, in so much that it could not establish “compelling circumstances” to persuade the NLRB to overturn the ALJ’s decision.

Date:  August 13, 2020

Order:  https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45831e1bf0


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

Breaking: Labor Secretary Rumored to Be Leaving Administration

A few hours ago, word leaked out that Labor Secretary Marty Walsh (“Walsh”) is in the midst of negotiations to head up the NHL Players Union and leave his position at the Labor Department. Walsh, who has served as the sole Labor Secretary under President Biden, has taken part in a labor renaissance of sorts as support for organized labor has increased during his term as Labor Secretary (although the number of workers that have joined a union over the past two years has not grown as mush as some expected.)  He has also overseen the ongoing negotiations with rail workers over a new contract, although that matter is still on shaky ground and playing out as we speak. As for who might step into the vacant Labor Secretary role, there are already rumblings that President Biden should nominate Deputy Labor Secretary Julie Su (a strong labor advocate) or even a progressive like Senator Bernie Sanders.  Until Walsh officially gives his notice, however, I would expect some/many potential...
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