The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

As with many labor & employment 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. On March 22nd, the Labor and Public Employees Committee (a committee of the Connecticut General Assembly) voted 9 - 4 to advance SB 318 which would prohibit employers from requiring workers to attend or participate in meetings concerning the employers’ views on religious or political matters. The vote ending up along party lines should not necessarily be a surprise as both sides have started to dig in and fight.  For instance, Republicans and business groups that oppose SB 318 argue that the passage of the legislation would amount to a “gag order” on employers.  The argument follows that SB 318’s definition of “political matters” is far too broad in that the legislation could be interpreted as preventing employers from speaking to their employees about executive laws, orders, and related measures that deal with the

Last Thursday, New York City Mayor Eric Adams held a press conference in which he announced that professional sports players, entertainers, musicians, and DJs would not be required to be vaccinated in order to play or perform in New York City. Readers might recall that New York City enacted one of the most stringent coronavirus vaccine policies in the country which included requirements that New York City athletes, entertainers, musicians, and DJs get the coronavirus vaccine or be barred from playing or performing in the city.  New York City’s coronavirus vaccine policy also required many public and private sector employees to get vaccinated as well or face termination.  (Note, approximately 1,400 public employees were terminated over their failure to get vaccinated.) While some cheered the Mayor’s decision to ease coronavirus vaccine mandates for certain players and performers, labor unions pushed back and argued these carve outs should exist for unvaccinated public and private sector

Hang onto your hats because this is an interesting story. Initiative 82 is a potential ballot measure that might go before voters in Washington, DC this coming June in which voters would be able to do away with the tipped wage in the city.  If approved, Initiative 82 would require that tipped workers (who currently receive $5.05/hour, plus tips) have their pay rate increased to $15.20/hour.  Eliminating this sort of sub minimum wage is a common fight for minimum wage advocates around the country.   Now in order for a ballot initiative to get before voters, at least 5% of registered voters in DC must provide their signature as well as at least 5% of registered voters from five of DC’s eight wards.  Last week it was announced that the 5% requirement of registered voters in DC was met.  However, the DC Board of Elections noted that it was not yet clear whether the 5% of registered voters from five of DC’s eight wards had been satisfied.  According to reports, 122 signatures in one ward ar

While we await results on the second election at the Amazon warehouse in Alabama, I want to highlight an article relevant to that topic (as well as a few other articles on other matters.)  To call 2022 the year of unions, so far, is a fair statement.  On that note, the first article about Starbucks and its efforts to curb the ongoing unionization is worth leading things off this week. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Howard Schultz Returning to Starbucks Amid Unionization Surge Recently, it was announced that Howard Schultz would return to Starbucks as interim CEO as the company following the retirement of its current CEO.  Of course, amidst the shuffle in its corporate structure, the company is trying to find a way to stymie the ongoing unionization efforts sweeping across its stores around the country.  In his nearly 30 year tenure with Starbucks, Schultz had a track record of preventing unionization of its company owned stores.  (As readers might

Yesterday, it was announced that a Seattle area Starbucks had voted to unionize with a 9 - 0 vote in favor of unionization (with one ballot being challenged by the company.) Yesterday’s vote marks yet another victory for workers at Starbucks that are seeking to turn the company on its head and unionize company owned locations.  Of course, this is not the first Starbucks location to unionize.  While it is not the first, it marks the first store in the Seattle area to unionize (as well as the first in the Pacific Northwest, home to Starbucks.) The past few months have proven to be quite fruitful for workers at Starbucks that have sought to unionize.  While this is the most recent successful unionization of a Starbucks, I think it is safe to say this will not be the last.  Stay tuned. For additional information:   https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/22/business/starbucks-union-seattle.html

As with many labor & employment 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 Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed HR 2116, also known as the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair Act of 2022 (the “CROWN Act”) with a 235 - 189 vote in favor of the legislation.  For those unfamiliar with this bill (or related bills that have previously been passed in cities and states), employers would be barred from discriminating against a worker on the basis of that worker’s hair texture or hairstyle, if that hair texture or hairstyle is commonly associated with a particular race or national origin. Now remember, just because the legislation cleared the House, that does not necessarily mean it is going to become law.  First, the Senate must approve it, which is no sure thing.  After all, the legislation can be filibustered in the Senate.  With Democrats, the main supporter o

At 12:01 AM this morning, over 500 workers at a Chevron owned refinery in the San Francisco area went on strike, following a breakdown in negotiations between the union, the United Steelworkers, and the company. The union indicated the strike would take place after Chevron’s most recent contract proposal was voted down and Chevron apparently refused to continue further discussions.  Keep in mind the prior contract between the union and Chevron expired about two months ago.  Despite the contract expiring, the parties continued working toward a settlement without striking.  What changed?  In short, the union has argued that given the high cost of living in the area, the workers needed a more substantial pay raise than what Chevron offered.  Despite Chevron apparently taking steps in the right direction, according to the union, the most recent proposal was still too far off from the union’s demands.  With Chevron withdrawing from the negotiation table (for the time being), that spurred th

It has been some time since I have come across a good article on right to work.  This week was the exception, given the below article noting some movement on the matter in Tennessee   I encourage readers to page through both articles this week, but pay particular attention to the first. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Tennessee Right to Work Advocates Ratchet Up Efforts to Support Ballot Measure This November, voters in Tennessee will have the opportunity to vote on whether to enshrine the state’s right to work law into the Tennessee Constitution.  Readers might recall that Tennessee already has a right to work law in place.  However, without the Tennessee Constitution being amended to include the state’s right to work law, it is more susceptible to being repealed.  Critics of efforts to enshrine the state’s right to work law into the Constitution argue that given that there have been no effort to repeal the law in nearly 75 years, it is pointless t

For those that have been paying attention over the past few months, unionization efforts have been taking off at various companies across the country.  Not to be glib for those readers that are strong supporters of labor unions, but workers seeking to unionize is nothing new. However, what makes some of these recent unionization efforts at Starbucks, Amazon, and REI, among others, especially noteworthy is the fact that there are tangible achievements being made to create the first unions at these companies.  Take Starbucks, for instance.  Prior to elections at three stores in Buffalo a few months ago, Starbucks had repeatedly been able to keep unions out of its company owned locations.  However, workers at two of the three Buffalo locations voted to unionize.  What happened afterward?  Workers at dozens (and dozens ) of locations elsewhere around the company announced they were taking steps to unionize as well.  In fact, a location in Mesa, Arizona recently became another store in whi

Last week, three lawsuits were filed against Salvation Army with the claimants alleging the company violated federal and state wage laws by failing to pay a minimum wage rate to thousands of people that lived or worked at Salvation Army’s adult rehabilitation centers around the country.  (Salvation Army operates about 120 rehabilitation centers around the country, which are separated into four regions.  Participants that are part of these Salvation Army rehabilitation centers often suffer from substance abuse, homelessness, and other life obstacles.) The lawsuits allege that thousands of people at these rehabilitation centers were required to perform “work therapy” in which they worked at least 40 hours each week in one of Salvation Army’s thrift store locations.  While the lawsuits claim that Salvation Army provided sleeping arrangements, food donated by third parties, and donated clothing, these benefits coupled with the pay were far below required wage rates.  (Salvation Army appare

Readers might recall that there had recently been renewed efforts in Hawaii to raise the state’s hourly minimum wage rate .  While several efforts in the past few years had fallen short, supporters of this year’s legislation have been hopeful that the Hawaii Legislature will finally approve the measure.  As the article below notes, those minimum wage advocates have a reason to be hopeful that this year is finally the year. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. United Airlines To Allow Some Unvaccinated Workers Back Last summer, United airlines indicated it would require all of its employees to get a coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  While employees with a sincerely held religious or medical exemption could still retain their job if they did not get the vaccine, many of these employees were either put on unpaid leave or given the opportunity to apply for positions within the company that were not “public facing.”  However, as Alison Sider at The Wa

Is the party over?  Perhaps, at least according to a recent lawsuit filed against Party City in which it is alleged that the company violated New York law when it failed to pay workers on time - allegedly paying workers bi weekly rather than weekly. The lawsuit, filed at the end of January, alleges that a group of workers in New York routinely unpacked and sorted inventory, reshelved returned items, stocked aisles, and swept and mopped the floor.  These workers claim they were paid bi weekly rather than weekly.  According to the lawsuit, New York law requires that manual laborers must be paid weekly.  (Clerical and other workers must be paid at least twice a month, according to New York law.)  Exceptions to the weekly pay stipulation for manual workers can be made for large employers in the state, so long as certain conditions are met and the New York Department of Labor approves the exemption request. Party City has yet to respond to the lawsuit but this is an interesting one for read

H/t to a regular reader of the blog for pointing out to me yesterday about a recent unionization effort that is underway at an Austin area Starbucks. Of course, the past few months have been chock full of unionization efforts at different Starbucks locations around the country.  While these unionization efforts spread out west with a successful unionization of a location in Mesa, Arizona in recent weeks, this development is somewhat noteworthy given that it appears to be the first movement at an Austin area location. The workers cited several efforts in seeking to unionize including being pressured to do more with less and feeling a lack of support from management.  Granted, while the article says the workers have formed a union, no election has taken place (let alone authorized by the National Labor Relations Board) nor has Starbucks recognized the employees and their effort to unionize.  Something tells me this is a developing story that is…brewing. For additional information:   ht

Smalls v. Amazon.com Services, LLC - United States District Court, Eastern District of New York Facts :  Christian Smalls (“Smalls”) worked at an Amazon fulfillment center and had approximately 60 workers that reported to him.  In March 2020, Smalls claimed that Amazon failed to implement policies to protect the fulfillment center workers, who were mainly minorities, from contracting the coronavirus. In late March, Smalls learned he had been in close contact with with a worker that tested positive for the coronavirus.  When he reported to work the next day, Smalls discovered there was no quarantine policy in place for close contacts, including himself.  Smalls requested that his superiors require a quarantine for any close contacts.  Over the next few days, Smalls apparently served as a go between with a group of minority workers and upper management at the fulfillment center in which Smalls pushed for better protections for workers.  After apparently getting no cooperation from upper

Minimum wage hikes, labor developments, and an update on a large employer’s coronavirus vaccination policy.  Even for those readers that might not be inclined to read through a particular article this week, I would encourage you to give the below three articles a quick read in your free time.  In particular, the minimum wage hike at Target is especially noteworthy, given that other large retailers will likely follow suit. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Target to Increase Hourly Pay Rate Up to $24/Hour On Monday, Target announced it would be increasing hourly pay rates up to $24/hour for workers in the most competitive markets.  The company, which already has a universal hourly pay rate of $15/hour is in a tight battle with other large retailers for a small labor pool.  Offering a pay rate of up to $24/hour is certainly going to to a long way in attracting (and retaining) workers. Labor Complaints Against Starbucks Increase As Josh Eidelson at Bloom

Readers will recall unionization efforts are underway at several large scale employers, including Amazon and Starbucks .  Now, there are whispers that Apple is the next large scale employer that is the next target for unionization efforts. There are reports that workers at several Apple retail locations around the country are considering unionizing with at least two locations apparently on the verge of filing paperwork with the National Labor Relations Board seeking to hold an election.  According to some workers at these locations, they claim their rate of pay is not keeping up with the cost of living and seek to get a bigger slice of the “pie” that Apple pulls in every year in revenue. It appears that these Apple workers have become emboldened by the recent success of unionization efforts at several Starbucks locations.  Starbucks, who had previously kept unions out of its corporate owned locations, is on its heels as it continues to fight unionization efforts across the country.  W

Last week, the New Hampshire Senate Commerce Committee voted 13 - 10 against moving forward with a proposed minimum wage bill which would have increased the statewide minimum wage rate from $7.25/hour to an eventual $15/hour. I had noted last year of renewed efforts to increase the statewide minimum wage rate , despite several prior attempts falling short.   Advocates for a wage hike pointed to the state’s $7.25/hour wage rate being among the lowest in the country as reason enough to pass minimum wage legislation.   (Of course that does not take into account the fact that New Hampshire’s hourly wage rate is among the lowest in the New England Area.) Nevertheless, with a 13 - 10 vote along party lines, this most recent attempt to increase the statewide minimum wage again falls short.  Proponents of increasing the minimum wage rate can at least take solace in the fact that this is in all likelihood just another roadblock to perhaps an eventual increase in the statewide wage rate. For add