The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

I came across a couple articles this week in relation to hourly pay that I want to bring to the attention of readers.  In regard to the first article, even for those readers that are not in California (or do not deal with California employment matters), it is still worth paging through this article for an in depth dialogue on the benefits/drawbacks of pinning wage hikes to rising inflation rates. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Potential $15.50/Hour Wage Rate in California: Good or Bad? It is widely expected the the statewide hourly minimum wage rate in California will rise to $15.50/hour in January, triggered in part because of rising inflation.  (Currently, employers with at least 25 workers must pay at least $15/hour.  Employers with less than 25 workers must pay at least $14/hour.  By 2023, all employers will be required to pay their workers at least $15/hour.  However, there is a trigger for a quicker wage hike in the event that inflation rise

A few months ago, there were elections held at several Buffalo area Starbucks in which workers took steps to unionize at the company .  While initial attempts to unionize several of the Buffalo area locations was successful, the union lost one election in the Buffalo area with a 12 - 8 vote against unionizing. While some might have thought that was the end of the road for that particular location, we have had an interesting development as of late.  Last week, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) sought to order Starbucks to recognize the union that lost the election on the grounds that the company had unlawfully intimidated and retaliated against workers that sought to unionize. What happens here is quite simple.  The Buffalo regional office of the NLRB has to issue a complaint against Starbucks, which was previously done.  That complaint argued that Starbucks fired two employees because they supported unionization, promised benefits to workers to not unionize, and subjected wor

Last week, it was announced that the union representing the U.S. Men’s National and U.S. Women’s National soccer teams had reached a deal with the U.S. Soccer Federation in which both the Men’s and Women’s teams will be paid equally, including for World Cup bonuses. Readers might recall that there had been a prolonged and drawn out legal battle by the U.S. Women’s National soccer team against the U.S. Soccer Federation as these female players sought higher pay and more equal benefits compared to their male counterparts.   While that legal fight had finally reached its conclusion , last week’s victory in regard to the terms of the new collective bargaining agreement is nothing short of a win. In part, the bonuses paid to teams in both the men’s and women’s World Cup will be put into a pool and split evenly among the Men’s and Women’s National teams.  (Of note, the total bonus pool for teams in the men’s 2022 Qatar World Cup is to be in the ballpark of $400 million.  Conversely, the tota

When I read through some articles, I often take for granted that readers of the blog will understand the nuances of the developments I come across and highlight here each week.  In particular, labor unions have had a bit of a resurgence this year, thanks in part to workers at Starbucks, REI, and Amazon.  With that being said, I think some readers might appreciate a primer on labor unions/unionization.  I want to lead things off this week with just that to provide a bit of a 30,000 foot overview of the topic. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. The ABC’s of Forming a Union With so many labor law development over the past few months, I think it is important to take a step back and make sure readers are familiar with the concept of unionization/how a union is formed.  I refer readers to this article from KUT in Austin for a thorough breakdown of unions, how a union is formed, and what happens after workers vote to unionize.  Grand Rapids Area Starbucks Lo

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a resolution by a vote of 217 - 202 that will allow Capitol Hill staffers (in the House, but not the Senate) to unionize without fear of retaliation. The House had previously allowed staffers to unionize but there was no framework in place to protect them from retaliation if they did in fact move to unionize.  With last week’s resolution, staffers will now be able to unionize and hold a vote if at least 30% of workers in a bargaining unit (each Congressional office) support a vote.  In effect, it is quite likely (if not a certainty) that some staffers will vote to unionize while peers in neighboring Congressional offices do not vote to unionize.  This will lead to somewhat of a haphazard unionization on Capitol Hill. If staffers successfully vote to unionize, they will be able to have a union bargain on a contract on their behalf.  As has been reported, alleged poor working conditions among some Congressional staffers had recently s

To call the ongoing unionization at Starbucks a situation that has been…brewing…for a few months now is an understatement.  With over 50 locations having voted to unionize, this has been far and away the top labor development through the start of 2022. With Starbucks workers making great strides in unionizing, that has caught the attention of many, including the White House.  In fact, President Joe Biden recently invited Starbucks union organizers to the White House for a visit which garnered media attention for the unionization effort.  However, notably absent from the White House visit were Starbucks executives or Starbucks workers that did not support unionization efforts. As you might guess, this did not sit well with Starbucks who felt the Biden Administration was significantly putting its finger on the scale to tip unionization efforts in favor of labor organizers.  Following the meeting at the White House, Starbucks sent a letter to Steve Riccheti, Counselor to President Biden,

Elon Musk has had his fair share of labor and employment law related stories over the years.  And no, we are not talking about this morning’s news that Musk’s bid to buy Twitter is on hold.  With that being said, I did want to note a Musk related development over at Tesla, as it applies to the employment context that is. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. U.S. House Hikes Staffer Pay Effective September 1st In recent days, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, announced that the minimum pay for Congressional staff will rise to $45,000.00/year starting September 1st.  In recent months, thanks in part to an infamous Instagram account , working conditions at the Capitol for Congressional staff has become a hot button issue that has been simmering.  With that Instagram account reporting on questionable work environments at the Capitol (such as low pay, long hours, and verbally abusive employers, among other issues), there has been increased attention on the

Readers might recall that an Apple retail location in Atlanta had taken steps to unionize followed by a retail location at Grand Central Station in New York City. As reported by NPR recently, we now have a third retail location that is taking steps to unionize.  Workers at a location in Towson, Maryland have sent a letter to Apple CEO Tim Cook and have stated that a majority of workers at the Towson retail location support unionizing.  The letter went on to urge Cook (and Apple) to not take any union busting steps to try and curb unionization. Apple has responded by noting that it pays its workers a competitive wage rate including offering an attractive compensation package that includes paid time off.  As we have seen with the retail workers at the Grand Central location, however, these benefits are apparently not enough as those workers are seeking a $30/hour minimum wage rate as well as increased benefit. For those readers feeling a bit of burnout over the ongoing unionization eff

Late last week, the Buffalo regional director of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued a complaint that alleged Starbucks had committed over 200 violations of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). The complaint accuses Starbucks of unlawfully interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees that were engaged in unionization efforts at the company.  In particular, Starbucks has been accused of closing stores in the Buffalo area, reducing compensation for workers, and engaging of surveillance of workers (presumably in efforts to curb unionization efforts.)  Of note the complaint alleged that “high level” Starbucks officials made repeated trips to the Buffalo area (again, under the premise that these visits were an effort to unlawfully coerce employees to not unionize.) Starbucks has yet to formally respond to these allegations although I would expect a response to be forthcoming shortly.  Stay tuned. For additional information:   https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/06/sta

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 April 29th, the Connecticut House of Representatives passed SB 163 which will prohibit employers in the state from holding mandatory meetings with employees in regard to unions and other sensitive topics (such as religion). These meetings, often referred to as captive audience meetings, have long been a target of organized labor.  With Democrats having the votes in the Connecticut Legislature to finally pass the legislation, SB 163 will now head to Governor Ned Lamont’s desk for signature. With the passage of SB 163, Connecticut will become the second state (following Oregon) to have a bar on captive audience meetings. For additional information:   https://trackbill.com/bill/connecticut-senate-bill-163-an-act-protecting-employee-freedom-of-speech-and-conscience/2232099/

Pardon the brief note this week, but I found myself tied up with a few projects that left me with little time to page through articles.  With that being said there are two updates n a minimum wage and labor law related topic that are worth highlighting.  I encourage readers to take a few minutes and page through these two updates. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Hawaii: The First State With an $18/Hour Minimum Wage Rate? As The Maui News reported earlier this week, the Hawaii Legislature approved legislation that will raise the state’s minimum wage rate to $18/hour by 2028.  The bill now goes to the desk of Governor David Ige who has previously indicated he supports a $18/hour wage rate.  Within 6 years time, Hawaii should have the highest minimum wage rate.  However, with some states having a plan in place to increase wage rates with inflation, it is possible that by 2028, other states will have an $18/hour (or higher wage rate.) Starbucks to Hik

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. Yesterday, there was a recent development from the U.S. Supreme Court that I wanted to bring to the attention of readers.  No, it is not the case you are thinking of here. Instead, this is the Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt case in which the Supreme Court will consider whether a highly paid employee (who made over $200,000/year) is entitled to retroactive overtime pay despite a regulation that carves out an exemption for highly paid executives, because he had been paid on a daily basis. In broad terms, the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) provides for overtime pay for workers that are paid on an hourly basis.  A worker is considered to be paid on a salary basis, rather than hourly, if the worker “regularly receives each pay period on a weekly, or less frequent basis, a predetermined amount” and witho

Earlier this afternoon, it was announced that workers at an Amazon warehouse in Staten Island have voted to reject forming a union with 618 votes against and only 380 in favor. Readers will recall that a few weeks ago, another Amazon in warehouse had voted to unionize.  (Bear in mind that Amazon is challenging the results of that election and the National Labor Relations Board is reviewing the matter.) That election marked a somewhat monumental moment at the company as that warehouse became the first Amazon warehouse to successfully form a union.  Attention then turned to whether lightning could strike twice in Staten Island and whether another successful election would occur. Despite labor advocates making a strong push to achieve another victory and Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lending their voice to the cause, that apparently did not do enough to sway those workers that were voting in this election. I think the question now centers on whether th