The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Does a U-Turn on Make-Whole Settlement Remedies, Part II
Business Better Podcast Episode: Bridging Campuses: Legal Insights on Education Industry Consolidation – Labor, Employment, and Benefits
Employee Rights in Non-Unionized Workplaces: What's the Tea in L&E?
The Labor Law Insider: How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part II
The Labor Law Insider - How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part I
Stumbling Your Way Into a Union: Key Advice for Employers: What’s the Tea in L&E?
The Labor Law Insider: What's Next for Labor Law Under the Trump Administration, Part II
The Labor Law Insider: What's Next for Labor Law Under the Trump Administration, Part I
The Burr Broadcast: Captive Audience Meetings
The Labor Law Insider - Elections Have Consequences: Labor Law Changes Anticipated Under Trump Administration, Part II
#WorkforceWednesday®: Biden’s Final Labor Moves - Employment Law This Week®
The Labor Law Insider - Elections Have Consequences: Labor Law Changes Anticipated Under Trump Administration, Part I
#WorkforceWednesday®: What a Trump Win Means for Unions - Employment Law This Week®
What's the Tea in L&E? "If You Don't Like It Here, You Can Leave!"
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 35: Navigating Union Campaigns with Armando Llorente of Llorente HR Consulting
The Labor Law Insider - Whistleblower Breaks Details of NLRB Mail Ballot Election Abuse – Part II
The Labor Law Insider: Whistleblower Breaks Details of NLRB Mail Ballot Election Abuse - Part I
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
The Labor Law Insider - NLRB Remedies: “Draconian” Says the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Thryv, Part II
A recent Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel enforced part and declined to enforce another part of an NLRB ruling that an employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by telling employees that the union’s...more
As discussed in our recent article, the introduction of SB 399 in California (approved and added as California Labor Code section 1137) sparked significant discussion and concern among California employers with union...more
As we reported here, California’s Senate Bill (S.B.) 399, took effect on January 1, 2025. This law prohibits employers from requiring employees to attend meetings about the company’s opinions on political or religious...more
As organized labor activity has been on the rise in recent years and stories about union-related matters have become regular news, labor relations questions have ever-increasingly become front-of-mind for employers. It is...more
On July 31, 2024, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed Senate Bill 3649, the “Worker Freedom of Speech Act,” (the “Act”) which prohibits employers from using “captive audience” meetings with employees to discuss an...more
Real World Impact: The newly enacted Illinois Freedom of Speech Act prohibits employers in Illinois from requiring employees to participate in employer-sponsored meetings if the meeting is designed to communicate an...more
Welcome to the third issue of The Academic Advisor for 2024. In this edition, we examine the following topics of import for schools, institutions of higher education, and other education-focused organizations: -...more
A federal judge in New York recently cast doubt on the validity of state laws that seek to restrict employer speech in connection with union organizing. In New York State Vegetable Growers Association, Inc. v. Letitia James,...more
Technology. It is the proverbial blessing and curse that has resulted in an increasing amount of litigation in the courts. One such lawsuit presented the issue of whether the First Amendment provides police officers and their...more
On May 17, 2022, Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont signed into law the so-called “captive audience” bill (Senate Bill 163), which prohibits employers from requiring their employees to (a) attend employer-sponsored meetings that...more
For decades, employers have been permitted to hold mandatory meetings or “captive audience speeches” in response to union organizing campaigns to present the company’s position on unionization. On April 7, 2022, the National...more
On November 16, 2020, the Missouri Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Missouri National Education Association, et al. v. Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, et al., Ferguson-Florissant School...more
An age old question under the National Labor Relations Act is what constitutes “picketing”? By the Supreme Court’s definition, picketing is inherently coercive and may not be directed against a neutral employer. An issue...more
On December 17, 2019, in a 3-1 decision split along party lines, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) restored to employers the right to restrict employees from using company email systems for nonbusiness purposes. The...more
On December 17, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) ruled that an employer’s rule prohibiting use of its email system for nonbusiness purposes did not violate employees’ rights under the National Labor...more
On October 28, 2019, the Ninth Circuit, following in the footsteps of the D.C. Circuit and the Second Circuit, affirmed an order entered by the NLRB confirming that prohibitions on secondary boycotts under Section...more
“Scabby the Rat” and “Corporate Fat Cat”…beware. A recent National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or the “Board”) Advice Memorandum has suggested that the use of oversized inflatable rats may constitute illegal secondary...more
Scabby, the gnarly, diseased, inflatable rat, has long been recognized as a symbol of a labor protest. During the Obama-era, the National Labor Relations Board likened the use of Scabby to peaceful, protected activities such...more
The National Labor Relations Board just decided that private sector unions cannot use fees paid by nonmembers to fund their lobbying efforts. Especially when coupled with last year’s momentous Janus decision at the U.S....more
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the appeals court that has jurisdiction over federal cases in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the U. S. Virgin Islands, recently held that a public employer violates the First...more
Labor friendly states will likely be looking for opportunities to lessen the financial blow of the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME. The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Interpipe Contracting v. Becerra just...more
The First Amendment’s free speech guarantee has proved determinative in a variety of very recent Supreme Court decisions. In Matal v. Tam (see here), the Court held that the First Amendment precludes denial of registration of...more
Synopsis: Ralphs Grocery v. Victory Consultants, 17 Cal. App. 5th 245 (2017), gives some solace to private property store owners. The Silver lining of the Victory Consultants grocery store decision—petitioners and signature...more
$90 Million Judgment Reinstated: Employers Must Relieve Employees Of All Duties During Their Rest Periods - Augustus v. ABM Sec. Servs., Inc., 2016 WL 7407328 (Cal. S. Ct. 2016) - Jennifer Augustus filed this...more
On November 16, 2016, a Texas federal judge permanently blocked the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) from enforcing its persuader rule in National Federation of Independent Business, et al. v. Thomas E. Perez, et al., Case...more