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
The Labor Law Insider—Dartmouth Men's Basketball Team Unionizes: Air Ball or Nothing But Net?
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 11: Understanding Unions with Patrick Wilson, Maynard Nexsen Attorney (Part 1)
The recent NLRB decision finding that mandatory employer meetings involving unionization discussions are unlawful includes other points that will affect employers....more
Since 1948, Section 8(c) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) had been interpreted to protect the First Amendment right of employers to bring employees together to exchange views, arguments, and opinions about...more
On November 13, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) held in Amazon.com Services LLC, 373 NLRB No. 136, that "captive-audience" meetings are unlawful under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Specifically, the...more
Since 1948, employers could lawfully require employee attendance at on the clock captive audience meetings, even under threat of discharge or discipline. That changed this week as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), in...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
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
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
Effective as of July 1, 2022, Connecticut law purports to grant an employee a statutory cause of action against his or her employer if the employer “subjects or threatens to subject any employee to discipline or discharge”...more
On April 29, 2022, organized labor achieved a long-sought political objective when the Connecticut House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 163, “An Act Protecting Employee Freedom of Speech and Conscience.” Effective July...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
The National Labor Relations Board, in one of its most significant decisions in recent years on “union protest” issues, has substantially eroded the protection given to “neutral” parties when unions erect large inflatable...more
A split Board concluded this week that a union did not engage in unlawful secondary activity under the NLRA when it stationed a 12-foot-tall inflatable rat—known all too well by employers as “Scabby the Rat”—and two 8-foot...more
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled 3-1 on July 21, 2021 that labor unions may continue to use large, inflatable balloons–usually in the shape of an ugly rat–to aid in publicity of labor disputes, whether...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
The D.C. Circuit recently rebuffed the National Labor Relations Board’s attempt to assert jurisdiction over adjunct faculty at Duquesne University, a religious college. Duquesne University v. NLRB, No. No. 18-1063 (D.C. Cir....more
Ogletree Deakins’ Traditional Labor Relations Practice Group is pleased to announce the publication of the summer 2019 issue of the Practical NLRB Advisor. This edition examines the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) new...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
The alternative dispute resolution landscape continues to evolve for employers with unionized workforces. Anheuser-Busch, LCC, 367 NLRB 123 (May 22, 2019), is the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) latest decision on the...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
In Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, No. 16-1466 (June 27, 2018), the Supreme Court of the United States significantly expanded the rights of nonunion public employees by...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
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