Posts

NLRB: Issues New Guidance on Employee Handbook Rules

APPLIES TO

All Employers Subject to the NLRA

EFFECTIVE

June 6, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

On June 6, 2018, the Office of the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued “Guidance on Handbook Rules Post-Boeing.” The new Guidance elaborates on a December 14, 2017 announcement that sets forth three categories of rules to help define when an employer’s policies violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).

Ninth Circuit: Tribal Casinos Must Obey NLRA

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, and WA Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 26, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

According to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, even self-governed tribal land must obey the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).  In National Labor Relations Board v. Casino Pauma, the circuit court stated that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to limit protected union activity.

Under the NLRA, employees have the right to engage in specified protected activities relating to improving or discussing working conditions, free of employer retaliation or adverse action.  At Casino Pauma, operated by the Pauma Band of Mission Indians and located on the tribe’s reservation, a number of casino workers began distributing union leaflets to customers entering the casino.  The employees were originally removed by security.  When they attempted to distribute leaflets some weeks later, the employees were disciplined.

The NLRB filed a complaint on behalf of the employees.  An administrative law judge found that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to interfere with protected union activities, and the circuit court agreed, stating that the NLRA applies to tribal employers.

Action Items

  1. Review the full text of the case here.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2018 ManagEase

Keeping Up with the NLRB – The Browning-Ferris Joint-Employer Standard is Back on Top

APPLIES TO

All Employers

EFFECTIVE

February 26, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Keeping up with the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) can be a challenge. A mere two months after its December 2017 ruling in Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Ltd., which determined a joint-employer relationship by looking at an employer’s actual control over employees, the NLRB vacated the Hy-Brand decision, causing the joint-employer standard to revert back to the August 2015 Browning-Ferris decision, which follows an indirect and reserved control standard for determining joint-employer status.

The reversal is the result of a technicality – a conflict of interest of one of the board members involved in the Hy-Brand decision. Prior to becoming an NLRB board member, William Emanuel worked for a private law firm that represented one of the companies involved in the Browning-Ferris case. When this relationship came to light, the NLRB issued an order vacating its Hy-Brand decision, stating that the board member should have been disqualified from participating in the ruling. For now, the Browning-Ferris standard is back on top. However, in light of the NLRB’s Memorandum 18-02, employers can likely expect to see continued changes on this and other topics. Stay tuned.

Action Items

  1. Review potential joint-employer relationships with legal counsel to minimize exposure.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.

© 2018 ManagEase

Fifth Circuit: Mandatory Class Action Waivers Do Not Violate the NLRA

APPLIES TO

All Employers with LA, MS, TX Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 7, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In a recent decision, the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed its positions that mandatory class action waivers do not violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). In Convergys Corp. v. NLRB, the Fifth Circuit stated that an employee’s right to a collective action is procedural, not substantive, and signing a waiver therefore did not violate any substantive rights under the NLRA.