NLRB Update: Significant Rulings for Employers
In their Labor Relations column, John P. Furfaro and Risa M. Salins review recent precedent-changing decisions from the National Labor Relations Board that involve standards for deferring NLRB action in favor of arbitration procedures under collective bargaining agreements, the presumption that employees may use their employer's email system to engage in statutorily protected communications about terms and conditions of employment, classifying workers as independent contractors, and more.
February 05, 2015 at 10:36 PM
10 minute read
The National Labor Relations Board recently issued a number of precedent-changing decisions with significant implications for employers. Since July 30, 2013, the board operated with a full complement of five members, including Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce (D) and members Kent Hirozawa (D), Nancy Schiffer (D), Philip Miscimarra (R) and Harry Johnson III (R). This month's column will discuss several of the board's latest actions, including rulings regarding arbitration deferrals, work email policies, classification of independent contractors, collective action waivers, as well as considerable changes to its rules for representation elections.
Arbitration Deferrals
On Dec. 15, 2014, in a 3-2 decision, the board in Babcock & Wilcox Constr. Co., 361 NLRB No. 132 (2014), announced significant changes in its standards for deferring NLRB action in favor of arbitration awards and arbitration procedures under collective bargaining agreements. The board held that going forward it will defer to an arbitration decision if the proponent of deferral shows (1) the arbitrator was explicitly authorized to decide the unfair labor practice issue; (2) the arbitrator was presented with and considered the statutory issue, or was prevented from doing so by the party opposing the deferral; and (3) board law reasonably permits the arbitration award.
The new standard will not be applied retroactively to pending NLRB cases. The prior deferral standard, decided in Olin Corp., 268 NLRB 573 (1984), placed the burden on the party opposing deferral and held deferral was appropriate where the contractual issue was “factually parallel” to the unfair labor practice issue, the arbitrator was presented generally with the facts relevant to resolving the unfair labor practice issue and the arbitration award was not “clearly repugnant” to the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
In Babcock & Wilcox, an employee allegedly was suspended without pay and subsequently fired because of her activities as a union steward. The case involved both contractual and statutory issues, namely, whether the employee was retaliated against for union activity and discharged without cause in violation of the applicable collective bargaining agreement and the NLRA. A union-management grievance review subcommittee denied the employee's grievance, and the employee filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB. Finding deferral of the NLRB action was appropriate under Olin, an NLRB administrative law judge (ALJ) dismissed the unfair labor practice allegation; the ALJ's ruling was appealed by the NLRB's general counsel.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Rippling Effect' of Pay-Transparency Laws to Test Legal Departments
Black Former In-House Lawyer Sues NYC Nonprofit, Alleging Pattern of Pay Inequities
NY Judge Rules on Former In-House Attorney's Claims Against Goldman Sachs
Con Edison Denies Former In-House Attorney's Gender, Age Discrimination Claims
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250