Labor & Employment Law Blog

On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States declined review of local ordinance language requiring supermarkets to keep their workforce for 90 days when a new owner takes over the business. Such ordinance language has become commonplace, for example, with hotel and other service industries specified by ordinance in some Bay Area cities. Contractors performing federal work face ...

On January 23, 2012, the Supreme Court of the United States declined review of local ordinance language requiring supermarkets to keep their workforce for 90 days when a new owner takes over the business. Such ordinance language has become commonplace, for example, with hotel and other service industries specified by ordinance in some Bay Area cities. Contractors performing federal work face similar ...

As previously reported here earlier this year, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") issued a complaint against a Chicago car dealership alleging the dealership violated Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") when it terminated an employee for posting on his Facebook page photographs and comments criticizing the dealership for serving only hot dogs and water to customers at a dealership sales event promoting a new model, and for posting photos from an accident that occurred at an adjacent dealership. On Wednesday, September 28, 2011, an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") ruled that the dealership did not wrongfully terminate the employee for the Facebook postings.  However, the ALJ found that the employer had several overly broad handbook policies that unlawfully restricted employees' Section 7 rights. The ALJ ordered the employer to post a notice informing employees of their rights to engage in protected activity.  

As we previously reported here, in May, it was announced that the Department of Fair Employment and Housing ("DFEH") would begin a new collaborative effort with the University of California at Irvine School of  Law to combat allegations of systemic discrimination. The DFEH and UC Irvine established a clinic in which law students will assist DFEH agents on tasks which include evaluation, investigation, and prosecution of discrimination claims.  

On June 21, 2011, the United States Department of Labor, Office of Labor-Management Standards, issued a little-known Notice of Proposed Rulemaking whereby the DOL seeks to expand the scope of and requirements of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29.U.S.C. 433). The proposed rule reverses long-standing practices under the law and subjects employers and those who provide advice to employers regarding union activities, such as attorneys and labor consultants, to increased reporting requirements. The public comment period ends on September 21, 2011, and the new rule is expected to be adopted shortly thereafter. The proposed rule has been viewed by some in the business community as a political favor for unions designed to enhance their ability to unionize employees.  A copy of the proposed rule and the opportunity to submit comments can be viewed by clicking here.  

As we previously reported here and here, in May, the National Labor Relations Board filed complaints against at least two employers alleging the employers violated the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") by disciplining employees on account of disparaging statements the employees posted on Facebook statements criticizing their employers. In one of those cases, the employer terminated an employee for posting on his Facebook page photographs and comments criticizing the dealership for serving only hot dogs and water to customers at a dealership sales event promoting a new model. Salespersons complained that serving only hot dogs and water could negatively impact their sales commissions. The NLRB alleges in both both of the cases that the employees statements posted on Facebook are protected concerted activity within the meaning of Section 7 of the NLRA because the statements involved a discussion among employees about their terms and conditions of their employment.

This week proposed changes in the rules affecting labor relations have come from two federal agencies.

As we previously reported here, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued on May 18, 2011, a press release announcing the NLRB issued a complaint against a non-profit employer for allegedly violating the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by terminating five employees who posted on a co-worker's Facebook page comments critical of their working conditions. According to the NLRB's press release," The complaint alleges that the Facebook discussion was protected concerted activity within the meaning of Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, because it involved a conversation among coworkers about their terms and conditions of employment, including their job performance and staffing levels."

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)  issued today a press release announcing the NLRB issued a complaint against a non-profit employer for allegedly violating the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by terminating five employees who posted on a co-worker's Facebook page comments critical of their working conditions. According to the NLRB's press release,"The complaint alleges that the Facebook discussion was protected concerted activity within the meaning of Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, because it involved a conversation among coworkers about their terms and conditions of employment, including their job performance and staffing levels." Click here to download and read the press release. 

The United States Department of Labor ("DOL") recently announced the release of a free smart phone application available in English and Spanish that will enable employees to "independently track the hours they work and determine the wages they are owed." According to the DOL, "users conveniently can track regular work hours, break time and any overtime hours for one or more employers." The DOL goes on to ...