Sparing no time since she issued her Advice Memorandum last week, NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo issued Memorandum GC 21-05, outlining her position on the importance of 10(j) injunction proceedings.
Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act authorizes the National Labor Relations Board to seek temporary injunctions in federal district courts to
Yesterday, in a long-awaited decision in General Motors LLC, 14-CA-197985 369 NLRB No. 127 (2020), the National Labor Relations Board (“Board” or NLRB”) gave employers a clearer pathway to disciplining employees who engage in abusive workplace conduct — including profane, racist, and sexually harassing remarks — even when the conduct coincides with concerted activities
Today the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) issued the final version of its Rule rolling back an Obama-era standard that deemed “indirect control” over a contractor or franchisee and/or the reservation of the ability to exert such control as being sufficient to establish joint employment under the National Labor Relations Act.
The Board majority
The National Labor Relations Board has issued a new rule that significantly changes its union election procedures, reversing controversial Obama-era rules that had expedited the election process.
The last revision was implemented in 2015, when the Obama Board revised the union election process to implement what were referred to by many as “ambush” or “quickie”
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) protects employees who engage in concerted activity. Since the Atlantic Steel case in 1979, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) has applied a four-part test to determine whether that protection extends to offensive language, often times finding offensive speech to be protected on
The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or “NLRB”) has issued notice that it will propose a new rule establishing that students who perform any services for compensation, including, but not limited to, teaching or research, at a private college or university in connection with their studies are not “employees” within the meaning of Section
Feel like the government shutdown has reduced news coming out of the federal administrative agencies? If so, January 17, 2019 likely provided a spark to your week. Last Thursday, National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) Chairman John Ring issued a letter which served as the most-recent move in the NLRB’s joint employer dance.
In his letter,
The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) announced today that it will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking tomorrow in the Federal Register regarding its joint employer standard. The Board indicated that its proposed rulemaking would foster “predictability, consistency and stability in the determination of joint employer status.” The Board indicated that an employer could
In a memorandum issued last week, NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb offered important guidance on how his office plans to prosecute claims of unlawful workplace rules in the wake of the Board’s restorative Boeing decision (365 NLRB No. 154 (Dec. 14, 2017)). As we discussed here last December, the Boeing decision created a sensible standard
On Monday, the NLRB unanimously vacated its December 2017 Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors decision, marking yet another abrupt reversal in the method for determining whether two employers can be held jointly liable for violations of labor and employment laws committed by either employer. In doing so, the Board effectively reinstated its 2015 Browning-Ferris Industries (“BFI”) decision,