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)
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
Navigating the Future of Intercollegiate Athletics: Implications of the Dartmouth College Student-Athlete Labor Decision
The Labor Law Insider: What Just Happened, and What's Next? 2023 Labor Law Retrospective, Part II
The Labor Law Insider - What Just Happened, and What’s Next? 2023 Labor Law Retrospective
DE Under 3: FAR Council Issued Final Rule Requiring Unionized Workforces on Large Federal Construction Projects
2023 Labor and Employment Highlights: Key Legal Developments, Trends, and Insights - Employment Law This Week®
The Burr Morning Show: NLRB Updates
The Labor Law Insider: Forget the Election: Union Representation Without the Messy Election is the Next Labor Law Reality, Part II
The Burr Broadcast: NLRB's Stericycle Decision and Its Implications for Employer Handbooks
Employment Law Now VII-139 - An Interview With an Employee-Side Attorney on L&E Issues
Labor Law Insider - Forget the Election: Union Representation Without the Messy Election is the Next Labor Law Reality, Part I
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
#WorkforceWednesday: How the NLRB’s Labor-Friendly Actions Are Affecting Union and Non-Union Employers - Employment Law This Week®
Join Dinsmore attorneys, along with our distinguished guest speakers, for guidance and insight on timely, cutting-edge topics impacting the legal profession and business. You can attend this event either in-person or...more
On Tuesday, March 9, 2021, the House of Representatives passed the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act.1 With the PRO Act, House and Senate Democrats seek to amend the National Labor Relations Act. Here, we outline a...more
It’s hard to keep up with the news these days. It sometimes feels like you can’t step away from your phone, computer, or TV for more than an hour or so without a barrage of new information hitting the headlines—and you’re...more
The decades-long battle over union security faces two important pivot points during the summer of 2018. On June 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States handed unions a major defeat in the season’s first major fight. ...more
Like the rest of the country, employers and HR professionals are left wondering what Donald Trump’s unexpected election as President means for the country. The Trump campaign was often light on detailed policy proposals, but...more
What is on the horizon for labor and employment policy in 2016, the last year of the Obama administration when the president will seek to cement his legacy, and a national election year when the White House and control of...more
On August 27, 2015, the National Labor Relations Board, in Lincoln Lutheran of Racine, 362 NLRB No. 188, overturned 53 years of precedent, holding that, like most other terms and conditions of employment, an employer’s...more
On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Illinois law that required homecare providers for Medicaid recipients to pay fees to a union. In Harris v. Quinn, the Court held that compulsory union agency fees imposed on...more
On Monday, the United States Supreme Court issued its anxiously anticipated decision in Harris v. Quinn, a case brought by Illinois home health aides challenging the requirement in a collective bargaining agreement that they...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