NLRB Issues a Flurry of Decisions Overturning Employee-Friendly Board Law

by Foley Hoag LLP

On December 14 and 15, 2017, the National Labor Relations Board issued several decisions rejecting employee-friendly rules previously adopted by the Board. The decisions, which address Obama-era Board rules on employer policies, joint employment and the appropriateness of bargaining units, were expected after Republicans regained majority control over the Board this fall. The flurry of decisions was triggered by the expiration of Chairman Philip Miscimarra’s term on December 17, 2017, and with it, the temporary loss of a Republican majority on the Board.

The Board Adopts a New Test for Reviewing Employer Policies

During the Obama Administration, the Board, to the alarm of some employers, took the view that a number of common policies employers have routinely included in their employee handbooks unlawfully prohibited employees from engaging in protected Section 7 activity. The justification that the Obama Board used was the standard it had adopted years earlier in its Lutheran Heritage Village-Livonia decision, in which the Board held that employer rules that employees could “reasonably construe” as prohibiting Section 7 activity were unlawful. The Obama Board expanded the Lutheran Heritage standard significantly, resulting in the rejection of handbook policies adopted for reasons wholly unrelated to employees’ protected concerted activity.

In a case involving The Boeing Company, however, the Board reserved course. In a 3-2 vote, it overturned its Lutheran Heritage decision. The Board concluded that the Lutheran Heritage test was flawed because it focused singularly on the employees’ ability to organize and failed to take into account the challenges employers face in the workplace. The Board held that, going forward, in evaluating whether an employer rule unlawfully restricts protected employee activity under Section 7 of the NLRA, it will consider the employer’s reasons for instating the rule, in addition to employee perceptions of the rule. Furthermore, the Board created three categories to classify employer rules. Category 1 includes rules that do not interfere with employees’ Section 7 rights, or do so in a way that is minimal compared to the justification for the rule, such that they are presumptively valid. Category 2 includes rules that are close calls and require close scrutiny in each case. Category 3 consists of rules that are clear violations of Section 7 rights and are presumptively invalid.

Many are heralding this decision as the end of the Board’s close second-guessing of routine employment policies.

The Board Overturns the Browning-Ferris Joint Employment Standard

In Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, the Board voted 3-2 to reverse its decision in Browning-Ferris Industries, holding that a company must have “direct and immediate control” over workers to be a joint employer for the purposes of federal labor law. In so holding, the Board rejected the less demanding standard adopted by the Board in 2015.

For decades prior to Browning-Ferris, joint employer status under federal labor law required “direct and immediate control” over essential terms and conditions of employment. Crucially, the joint employer had to not only possess such power but also exercise it. In Browning-Ferris, the Board eliminated that rule and instead held that an entity that exercises indirect control or has reserved but unexercised control over the terms and conditions of employment could qualify as a joint employer. This more relaxed standard subjected many more entities to joint-employer status and related obligations and, according to critics, created uncertainty surrounding companies’ potential liability as a result of joint employment relationships.

In Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Inc., the Board excoriated the Browning-Ferris decision, arguing that the decision exceeded the Board’s statutory authority and upended a longstanding and stable rule for a vague and unpredictable one. The Board also stated that Browning-Ferris lacked adequate justification in law and policy and adopted the rule without the “clear congressional command” needed to make such a significant change in the Board’s precedent. Accordingly, the Board returned to the pre-Browning-Ferris standard, requiring “direct and immediate control” to find a joint employment relationship.

The Board’s decision, along with the Secretary of Labor’s June 7, 2017 withdrawal of the Department of Labor’s 2016 Administrator’s Interpretation on joint employment regarding enforcement of the Fair Labor Standard Act, indicates that federal agencies in the Trump era will be taking a narrower view of joint employment than they took during the Obama Administration.

The Board Eliminates the “Overwhelming Community of Interest” – a/k/a “Micro-Unit” – Standard for Determining Appropriate Bargaining Units

With its 3-2 decision in PCC Structurals, Inc., the Board overturned an Obama-era standard for determining appropriate bargaining units for collective bargaining. In its 2011 decision in Specialty Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center of Mobile, the NLRB held that if the Board concluded that the workers in the petitioned-for unit shared a traditional community of interest, then the unit was appropriate, and the burden shifted to the party seeking a larger unit (usually the employer) to show that excluded employees share “an overwhelming community of interest” with the petitioned-for employees. This heightened standard made challenging the bargaining units chosen by unions extremely difficult. As a result, unions were increasingly petitioning to organize small units of employees, referred to as “micro-units,” because the Specialty Healthcare standard made it difficult for employers to successfully challenge them.

In PCC Structurals, Inc., the Board dispensed with Specialty Healthcare’s heightened burden for challenging petitioned-for bargaining units, and returned to the traditional community of interest standard that had long been in place before Specialty Healthcare. Now the Board will determine if petitioned-for employees “share a community of interest sufficiently distinct from employees excluded from the proposed unit to warrant a separate appropriate unit.” This standard considers not just commonalities between the petitioned-for employees, but also whether excluded employees share those same commonalities. Going forward, unions will have a more difficult time organizing small, “micro-units.”

* * *

With Chairman Miscimarra’s term expired, the Board now has two members from each party. As a result, the Board is not expected to issue any significant decisions until President Trump’s nominee to the Board is confirmed some time in 2018. However, once Trump’s pick is confirmed, it is expected that a more conservative interpretation of federal labor law will continue to prevail at the Board.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Foley Hoag LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Foley Hoag LLP

Foley Hoag LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.