Labor Law Insider - Collective Bargaining: Ins and Outs, Nuts and Bolts, Part II
The Labor Law Insider - Collective Bargaining: Ins and Outs, Nuts and Bolts, Part I
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 11: Understanding Unions with Patrick Wilson, Maynard Nexsen Attorney (Part 1)
Labor Law Insider—Dartmouth Basketball Team Unionizes: The NLRB Sets a Pick for Unions
The Burr Broadcast: Dartmouth Men's Basketball Team Unionization Efforts Explained
DE Under 3: FAR Council Issued Final Rule Requiring Unionized Workforces on Large Federal Construction Projects
The Labor Law Insider - Decertification of Union Bargaining Unit: What’s Happening Today, Part II
Labor Law Insider – Decertification of Union Bargaining Unit: What’s Happening Today
The Labor Law Insider: Project Labor Agreements, Part I
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Updates, Quick EEO-1 Deadline - Employment Law This Week®
The Labor Law Insider: Understanding the Risk of Strikes Faced by the Healthcare Industry
Employment Law Now V-106 - BREAKING OSHA ETS NEWS: Extending the Stay and Choosing a Lottery Winner
COVID-19 Vaccine Challenges in the Workplace
When Dr. Strangelove Met Jimmy Hoffa
6 Key Takeaways | National Labor Relations Board Issues New Final Rule on Joint Employers
#WorkforceWednesday: Kickstarter Unionization, Coronavirus Guidance, Class Action Waivers - Employment Law This Week®
#BigIdeas2020: NLRB’s Actions Impact Employers in 2020 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
Employment Law This Week®: DOL’s Final Overtime Rule, CA Codifies “ABC Test,” Pay Data Collection Beyond 2018, NLRB’s Busy Summer
NLRB Wraps Up a Busy Summer 2019 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
Bill on Bankruptcy: Stockton May Win the Battle, Lose the War
In a decision that could have a significant financial impact on many labor unions, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that personal care providers, who are considered state employees only for limited collective bargaining...more
The State of Illinois cannot require Rehabilitation Program “personal assistants” (PAs) who decide not to join a union, to pay compulsory union dues, commonly known as “agency fees,” the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Harris v....more
On Monday, the Supreme Court took a swipe at public sector compulsory unionism. In doing so, the Court took a slice out of decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence and suggested a future re-thinking of agency fees in the public...more
Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits a public-employee union from collecting an agency fee from home-care workers who do not want to join or...more
On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Harris v. Quinn, No. 11-681, holding that the First Amendment does not permit a state to compel public employees to subsidize speech on matters of public concern by a union...more
On the last day of its 2013-2014 session, the U.S. Supreme Court held today that (1) for-profit companies are protected as "persons" under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) and (2) that the...more
Today, in a 5 to 4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to extend its previous holdings regarding “fair-share” fees (fees that an employee who refuses to join a union is required to pay in lieu of union dues) to...more
In its much anticipated decision in Harris v. Quinn, 573 U.S. __ (2014), the Supreme Court of the United States in a five to four ruling struck down an Illinois regulatory framework that required personal assistants (PAs) for...more