In a series of tweets, the National Labor Relations Board is using social media in an attempt to increase concerted and union activity under the NLRA.
This blog recently discussed the upswing in EEOC retaliation charges and what employers can and should do about this undeniable trend.
In 2012, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the “Board”) found a “courtesy” policy unlawful. Since then, the NLRB has continued to create more and more tension between the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or the “Act”) and employers’ legitimate interests in maintaining and enforcing workplace guidelines governing courtesy in a nondiscriminatory fashion.
If two Republican United States Senators have their way, membership on the National Labor Relations Board will be increased from five to six, and other significant changes will be made to the National Labor Relations Act.
Asking Coworkers for Assistance in Supporting Legal Claim May Constitute Concerted Activity Under the NLRA
Most employers are aware that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects individuals from harassment and discrimination, and further protects them from filing claims alleging such harassment or discrimination.
There is some confusion in the employer community about the obligation to post a notice concerning union organizing rights.
Following a trend that has developed over the last several years, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) recently found that the termination of a Starbucks employee violated the National Labor Relations Act (the “NLRA” or the “Act”), even though the employee had engaged in extremely offensive, obscenity-filled conduct in the presence of customers.
Portfolio Companies Beware: Even Non-Unionized Companies Must Comply with the National Labor Relations Act
It comes as news to a majority of non-union employers that the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) applies to them even without the barest hint of union activity.
An NLRB Administrative Law Judge issued a Decision on April 29th in which he found that when a waiter in a restaurant in New York City, acting alone, instituted a class action lawsuit claiming violation of state or federal wage and hour laws, he was engaging in concerted activity on behalf of himself and co-workers, even if none of those co-workers are aware of the filing.
Percolating for the last couple of years has been the question of whether a “savings clause” or a “disclaimer” in an employee handbook or policy manual would be sufficient to protect policies in the handbook from attack under the NLRA.