EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR
REGULATIONS
Chapter 15
Meiners, Ringleb & Edwards
The Legal Environment of Business, 12th Edition
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CHAPTER ISSUES

Employment-at-Will

Substance Abuse

Worker Health and Safety

Workers’ Compensation

General Regulation of Labor Markets

Major Labor Relations Acts

The National Labor Relations Board

Unionization

Collective Bargaining
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
AT-WILL EMPLOYMENT
Employers: Can hire and fire who they want
 Employees: May quit when they want
 Contracts can limits to at-will presumption
 Exceptions:
 Refusing to commit an illegal act
 Important public duty (jury duty)
 Public right (filing for workers’ compensation)
 “Whistle Blowing”
 Contracts in violation of public policy, i.e. exculpatory
agreements
 Dismissal: If firm dismisses employee in violation of
public policy exception, employee may sue for wrongful
discharge or retaliatory discharge

©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
BALLALATAK V. ALL IOWA AGRICULTURE ASSN.







Ballalatak worked as a security supervisor. Two employees were
injured in a work-related accident. Called Ballalatak and reported
injury. Ballalatak drove to scene, helped get men to hospital & filled
out accident report.
Later general manager, Nowers, told the 3 men to meet with him
before returning to work. Told the men their medical expenses would
be taken care of without filing for workers’ compensation. Later,
injured men told Ballalatak they were concerned they would not
receive workers’ compensation benefits.
Ballalatak told Nowers the workers had rights to benefits.
Nowers fired him. Ballalatak sued, saying he was fired for asking re:
workers’ compensation duties to the injured workers.
Nowers claimed he fired him for insubordination.
District court dismissed suit.
Ballalatak appealed.
(Continued)
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
BALLALATAK V. ALL IOWA AGRICULTURE ASSN.







HELD: District Court judgment affirmed.
Usually employer may fire an at-will employee at any time.
Exceptions are if discharge is contrary to public policy. Ballalatak
claims he was fired for raising concerns to his employer about
workers’ compensation claim rights.
Ballalatak argued public policy interests should extend to
supervisors (him) who advocate such benefits for other employees.
Court protects employees exercising their own statutory rights.
Ballalatak was not fired to secure his OWN right. Nor was he fired
for refusing to violate workers’ compensation law. Fired for his
attempt to ensure his employer did not violate statutory right of
other employees.
Iowa law does not protect internal advocates for other employees.
Law also does not protect employee who asserts other employees
may contact an attorney about workers’ compensation rights.
Ballalatak loses.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
NONCOMPETE AGREEMENTS

Employees sign not to leave employment and compete directly
with employer.

Different states differ:


Some allow them absolutely

Some states allow court to imply reasonable terms in order to
save the covenant in part

Other states will eliminate these agreements entirely

Others – common law governs, allowing if restraints are
reasonable in time and extent of coverage.

Other states, like CA, say that almost every contract that
restrains anyone from lawful business is void.
Employers must pay attention to individual state law in this area.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
ZAMBELLI FIREWORKS MANUFACTURING CO. V. WOOD




Zambelli is one of the oldest & largest fireworks companies in the
U.S.; does business in most states.
Wood was hired by Zambelli in 2001 to work as pyrotechnician and
choreographer to produce fireworks displays with music
On the job, Wood learned of technical trade secrets, client lists,
pricings, costs & contract terms. Zambelli paid for Wood to become
a certified trainer for the Pyrotechnic Guild International.
Noncompete agreement signed in 2005 said that if Wood left
Zambelli, he
 Would not work for a competitor in the U.S. for 2 years
 Would not solicit former clients
 Would not disclose or use trade secrets AND
 If there was litigation and Zambelli prevailed, Wood would pay
all legal fees & costs.
(Continued)
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
ZAMBELLI FIREWORKS MANUFACTURING V. WOOD







Wood was hired by Pyrotecnico, a major competitor. Signed an
agreement he would not take or use an Zambelli information or trade
secrets.
Pyrotecnico agree to pay his salary for two years if needed because
of covenant with Zambelli & also would cover legal expenses. Wood
resigned from Zambelli and went with Pyrotecnico.
Zambelli sued to enforce covenant not to compete.
District Court held: Agreement was enforceable under Pennsylvania
law; enjoined most technical work by Wood.
Wood and Pyrotecnico appealed.
HELD: District Court decision affirmed.
Zambelli had a legitimate business interest in its goodwill & Wood’s
specialized training & skills. Agreements are upheld when restrictions
are reasonable to protect employer’s interests.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
ANTI-RAIDING COVENANTS

Employees required to sign an agreement they will not recruit fellow
employees for another company when they leave their current
place of employment

Varies from state to state

Some courts hold clauses in violation of public policy

Is an illegal restraint on competition

Other courts hold the as enforceable

New York court held that once employee leaves place of
employment, continued restraints are not favored

Exception: to protect things, i.e. trade secrets

California & Texas have held that covenants limited in time &
coverage are enforceable

In Missouri, legislature specifically held such covenants legal
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
SUBSTANCE ABUSE

Alcohol the most commonly abused

8% of workers are serious alcohol abusers

Another 3-8% of adults abuse or addicted to illegal or
improperly dispensed drugs

One in eight of workers have substance abuse problem
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
A COSTLY ISSUE FOR BUSINESS

Total economic cost over $250 billion per year; cost to employers
~ $100 billion per year.

Safety Issues ~ workers under influence of alcohol or other drugs
are 3.6 times more likely to be injured or to injure another

Those who abuse alcohol, even if not under the influence – 70%
greater chance of on-the-job injury

National Transportation Safety Board found that alcohol or other
drug-impaired workers caused many RR accidents.

Alcohol or other drugs are a factor in 1/3 of all accidents involving
truck drivers killed in accidents.

Insurance costs are about double for families with an alcoholic.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ACT
Requires all companies of more than $25,000 worth of
business with the federal government to certify they have
“drug-free” workplace:
 Publish policy statement
 Establish drug awareness program
 Make known availability of program
 Require employees to notify employers of any drugrelated convictions
 Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act
• Employers who operate aircraft, public transportation, or
commercial motor vehicles must be tested for use of
alcohol or illegal drugs. Pre-employment testing, random
testing during employment and testing after accident

©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
EMPLOYEE SUBSTANCE ABUSE POLICIES










Pre-employment screening usually OK (many states say testing after
job offer is extended)
Testing employees on annual basis or part of occasional physical
exams usually legal. Examination must be voluntary or directly
related to ability to perform job
Safety sensitive jobs
Random drug test. When announced as a condition of employment
(Notification)
After accidents – OK
“Reasonable suspicion” – document this carefully in employee file
 Announced policy of such tests and safety is an issue
Use Certified Labs for drug testing results
Give all employees copy of company policy and keep a signed
receipt from employee
Make policy clear
Check with attorney
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
WORKER HEALTH AND SAFETY




Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSHAct) created:

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)

The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (OSHRC)

The National Institute for Occupation Safety and Health Council
(NIOSH)
OSHRC reviews administrative cases brought by OSHA
NIOSH does studies to help set safety standards
Safety Inspections



Inspectors visit workplaces and respond to workers’ reports of problems
Marshall v. Barlow’s Inc. (OSHA inspectors routinely obtain
administrative warrants that don’t require show of probable cause;
the warrant requirement is not difficult.)
Penalties may run from small fines to millions for multiple violations.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS SERVICES, INC. V. SOLIS








Caterpillar Logistics handles parts orders for Caterpillar products.
Employees locate parts; put them on conveyor belt; pack parts in
boxes to ship. Each employee handles ~ 650 parts per day. Work
requires repetitive hand, wrist, elbow & shoulder movements.
A month after MK began working she had elbow pain.
Diagnosis indicated swelling in ligaments & tendons and around
joint. Company MD put her on leave for 3 months. Same problem
after she returned to work. Transferred her to position that required
less movement – that took care of the problem.
Caterpillar Logistics had a review panel of 5 specialists in
musculoskeletal disorders determine if MK’s injury was work-related.
Concluded problem was prior to MK’s going to work, and not workrelated.
Dept. of Labor disagreed. Assessed a $900 fine for failing to report
work-related injury.
Administrative Law Judge upheld penalty.
OSHRC upheld decision, which became the final decision of the
Secretary of Labor.
Caterpillar filed to review the order.
(Continued)
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS SERVICES, INC. V. SOLIS





There was competing evidence re: reason for injury. There is no
need for “tedious opinions” or “an avalanche of detail” but does
require agency to test its hypothesis against competing hypotheses.
Here it ignored strong indications that its favored witness got things
wrong. Record does not show an elevated incidence of epicondylitis
among the workers in the packing department.
Statistical significance and frequency to imply a causal role of
workplace conditions were not performed and ALJ disregarded
experience of Caterpillar and did not find one way or the other re:
this statistical significance.
Agency failed to consider what Caterpillar’s actual experience was –
Commission never discussed the subject.
Secretary’s decision is vacated. Caterpillar Logistics wins.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
WORKERS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

OSHA standards concern safety.

Health standards have also been issued.

Protection from asbestos, vinyl chloride, coke-oven
emissions, and other industrial carcinogens

“Must adequately insure to the extent feasible . . . that
no EE will suffer material impairment of health or
functional capacity.”

See Exhibit 15.1
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
WORKERS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom)
•
Issues exposure limits for some specific toxic substances
•
Chemical producers and users conduct a “hazard
determination” of chemicals they use/produce
•
Where these chemicals are used, employers must have:
1. A written plan that includes

List of hazardous chemicals in workplace

Manner in which safety data sheets, chemical labels, and
worker training about chemical safety is handled

Description of how employees will be trained for nonroutine tasks (e.g. chemical spills or explosions)
2. Labels for chemical containers
3. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)
4. Employee Training Programs
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CYBER LAW
“SOCIAL MEDIA RULES IN THE WORKPLACE”



Policies making clear that organization has the right to access emails that come to company computers or accounts
Software scans e-mails for red flag words – sex, guarantee, social
security number, etc.
Reduces:
Lost work time
 Litigation from harassment from e-mails with sexual content
 Loss of information that should be secure




Maryland: First state to ban employers from requesting access to
social media account
Some employers ask for voluntary access to social media but do
not insist.
Remember: Everything once posted, even if removed, can be
retrieved later.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

States enact worker’s comp. laws to provide employer paid
insurance for work-related accidents

Reduced payments from tort damages to a schedule

Sometimes employees prefer to sue for more $

Objectives:
1) Provide benefits to work-accident victims regardless of fault
2) Provide a certain remedy and relieve hassles of tort litigation
3) Protect public and private charities from undue burden
4) Reduce fees to lawyers and expert witnesses
5) Encourage ER safety w/accident rating-based premium
6) Provide open communication of accident for future safety
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
BENEFITS AND INCENTIVES





Obligations to employees, NOT independent contractors
Companies pay premiums based on injury claims records –
vary widely among states and occupations
Different states have different systems, rules, payout
histories
Usually worker receives 2/3 of their gross wages as disability
income
 As low as $500 in some states to over $1,500 in others
Benefit Categories:
 Death
 Total disability
 Permanent partial disability
 Temporary partial disability
 Medical expenses
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
LONG V. SUPERIOR SENIOR CARE, INC.

Long was an in-home certified nursing assistant (CNA) working for
Superior Senior Care. Company had 5 employees in its office and 100
independent contractors. Clients would contact Superior; it would post
requirements to match CNAs with clients.

Superior received fee for referral service; clients deposit funds in an
escrow account with Superior; CNAs paid from escrow account. Long
was told her pay would be $10/hour. Duties based on client needs. She
didn’t have to take any assignment – could choose. General duties:
cooking, house cleaning, laundry, helping clients shower and move
around.

Was assisting a client move from wheelchair to bed when client “went
limp” – became dead weight. Her back popped as she struggled to help
client. In pain, received a back brace at hospital, but eventually couldn’t
work.
(Continued)
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
LONG V. SUPERIOR SENIOR CARE, INC.

Filed for workers’ compensation. Superior said she was
independent contractor, not employee.

Administrative Law Judge held Long was an employee.

Commission reversed – that she was an independent
contractor – not eligible for worker’s compensation.

Long appealed.

Whether an person is an employee or independent
contractor depends on facts of each case.

Here, Long was acting as an independent contractor.

Held: Affirmed.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE




Family & Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Applies to private employers
with 50+ employees and all government jobs
12 weeks unpaid leave
 After childbirth or adoption
 To care for seriously ill child, spouse or parent
 In case of employee’s own serious illness
Pertains to “serious health condition”

More than 3 consecutive days of incapacity & treatment for condition
involving 2 or more treatments, including exams; or one treatment with
continuing prescription medicine or special equipment

Incapacity due to pregnancy

Incapacity or treatment for chronic, serious health condition

Absence from multiple treatments & recovery for surgery or condition
that results in more than 3-day period of incapacity left untreated
Exempts “key” employees –10% highest paid that would cause
economic harm to employer
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
CALLISON V. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

Callison worked for city. Diagnosed with anxiety caused by
stress. Used a lot of sick leave; was placed on Sick Abuse
List. Required to get medical certification for all sick days;
subject to penalties for violations. Employee on sick leave
must call hotline if leaves home. Sick leave investigator
calls homes to see if employees are there.

Callison took 3 months FMLA leave. City checked on him.
Often not home. Suspended for failure to follow policy.
Callison sued, saying he was not subject to discipline while
on FMLA leave. Said discipline by the City was retaliatory.
Trial court held for City. Callison appealed.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
CALLISON V. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA

HELD: Affirmed. City did not engage in prohibited acts by
their policies.

There is no right in the FMLA that employee is “left alone”
when under the Act.

Employers may check to ensure employees on leave do
not abuse their leave, especially if they are on the
employer’s Sick Abuse List.

Internal call-in policy does not diminish protections of the
FMLA.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
GENERAL REGULATION OF LABOR MARKETS

Family & Medical Leave

Hiring Legally

Federal Minimum Wage Requirement

Occupational Licensure & Regulation

Warning Employees of Plant Closings

Employee Retirement Plans
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
HIRING LEGALLY







For every person hired, employer must have an I-9 form on file.
Documents must be presented for proof of identity and
employment eligibility
General New Employment Procedure
Balance verification of employee and yet avoid discrimination
 Deals with the I-9 system and documents specified on the I-9
form
Also use E-Verify Program (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services electronic verification system) (USCIS)
 Program has had difficulties with accuracy
 Many federal contracts require E-Verify use
 Some states (i.e. Arizona & Mississippi) also require E-Verify
Can’t hire illegal immigrants
Fines & criminal Penalties – Can be large for sloppy record
keepers
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
FEDERAL MINIMUM WAGE AND TAX
REQUIREMENTS

Initiated in 1938 – as part of Fair Labor Standards Act

Averages about 50% of the average manufacturing
wage

Minimum wage of $7.25/hour as of 2009

Some states like California, have high min. wages

Some state laws cover employers exempt from federal
law

See International Perspective “Flexibility in Labor Markets”
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
OCCUPATIONAL LICENSURE AND REGULATION







Few controls at federal level – most restrictions by states
Usually a state commission determines entry criteria such as formal
education or apprenticeship or by testing
Ability through certificate to practice as lawyer, doctor, nurse, dentist,
veterinarian, barber, architect, psychologist, dog groomer,
beekeeper, massage parlor operator, etc. etc. etc.
Employees in contact with children/other vulnerable people often
undergo criminal background check
Laws range from affecting how businesses provide reference to
when employees paid their final pay check
Many states require time off to employees to vote and to attend
parent-teacher conferences
Importance of state laws
 Many small to medium size firms unaware of details of laws –
often unwittingly violate them.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
WARNING EMPLOYEES OF PLANT CLOSINGS

Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN)

Employers with 100+ full-time employees must give advance notice
of plant closing or mass layoff if 50+ employees affected.

Notice given directly to each affected EE 60 days in advance of
closing or layoff.

Notices must be for permanent termination and reduction in work
time of 50% or more for 6 months or longer.

EE’s who do not receive proper notice may sue for up to 60 days
back pay, benefits, interest & attorney’s fees.

Local government may sue company for up to $500/day for each
day there was no notice.

Some states have plant closing requirements beyond federal
requirements.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PLANS

Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)

Guarantees expectations of retirement plan
participants – protects benefits after reasonable length
of employment

Vesting requirements – participants receive benefits
after certain length of employment

Mandatory vesting – 3 different options established by
ERISA

Protects workers in case of closing – will still get their
benefits

Statutes are complex involving lengthy regulator filings
for pension & benefit plans – need for expert guidance
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
MAJOR LABOR RELATIONS ACTS


Norris-La Guardia Act of 1932
• Only major law passed before the NLRA. Ended court
intervention when employers plead to stop strikes and other union
activities as a violation of antitrust law. No court injunctions in
nonviolent labor disputes such as strikes, belonging to a union,
publicizing a labor dispute, picketing, etc.
• Declared that every worker “have full freedom of association, self
–organization, and designation of representatives of his choosing
to negotiate terms and conditions of his employment.”
• Prohibits employers requiring employees to sign yellow-dog
contracts – agree to NOT join a union or risk being fired if they do
1935 Wagner Act (NLRA): Right of workers to unionize; created
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
 Monitors unfair labor practices. Issues few rules – prefers
development through dispute resolution process
 Board’s decisions can vary with political makeup – outcome of
proceedings various over time more than most agencies
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
MAJOR LABOR RELATIONS ACTS


1947 Taft-Hartley Act ~ Labor-Management Relations Act: (Amended NLRA)
Employers have right to go to NLRB – protects employers. Unions are
prohibited from:

Coercing employees to support union

Refusing to bargain in good faith with employers

Carrying out certain kinds of strikes “secondary boycotts,” charging
“excessive” union fees, or “featherbedding”

Going on strike during 30-day “cooling off” period or during 60-day period
ordered by the President.
1959 Landrum Griffin Act ~ Labor-Management Reporting & Disclosure Act:
(Amended NLRA) Increased reporting, regulation of internal union affairs;
protects union members from improper actions by leaders through:

Monitoring leadership

Union member bill of rights
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD






Administrative agency created to
monitor unfair labor practices and
assure that union representation
elections are fair
Jurisdiction: labor dispute that “affects
interstate commerce”
About 30,000 cases a year, most are
unfair labor charges
“Unfair labor practices” – actions that
impede the goals of the NLRA
Hearing is before administrative law
judge (ALJ)
 Is an employee of the NLRB
 Issues an order
Order is final unless one party files an
exception





If exception filed, appeal is heard by
Washington panel of 3 NLRB
members
 Sometimes the entire board
may hear an appeal
If one party refuses to accept
board’s decision, case will be
referred to U.S. Court of Appeals
 For enforcement or review of
order
In rare instances case may go the
U.S. Supreme Court for final review
Presidents are generally “pro-labor”
or “pro-management.”
Presidential appointment to the
Board can be politically sensitive
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE COMPLAINTS

Examples of employer conduct
violating NLRA
 Threatening employees with
loss of jobs or benefits if they
join or support a union
 Threatening to close a plant if
employees vote for
unionization
 Questioning employees about
union activities
 Promising benefits to
employees if the do NOT
support a union
 Giving employees worse
assignments for participating
in protected activities

Examples of union conduct
violating NLRA
 Threatening employees with
loss of job if they don’t support
the union
 Refusing to help employees
with grievances who have
criticized union leaders
 Engaging in picket line
misconduct, such as
threatening non-strikers
 Striking over issues unrelated
to employment terms and
conditions
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
NLRB REMEDIES

Posting a notice in the workplace

Issuing a cease and desist order

Providing back pay for lost wages

Reinstating dismissed workers

Issuing an order to bargain with the union
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
UNIONIZATION
Representation Elections
 Employees sign authorization cards - need 30% to go
to NLRB for an election
 Campaign – by union and management
 NLRB supervised election:
 More than 50% vote yes?
 If so, union certification is granted
 Is exclusive bargaining agent for all employees. If
not, union fails.
 Can also have 30% call for election to decertify union
 NLRB and courts do not permit access to company
property by outside organizers.

©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
AGENCY SHOPS




When Union is selected to be collective bargaining agent, workers
who join pay union dues
Agency Shops – Majority of employees vote to be represented by
Union
 Members pay union dues
 Non-members pay agency fees (a little lower than union dues)
 Unions give $ to support political activities, including candidates
 May do this under strict requirements
States pass right-to-work laws that prohibit agency shops. Have
right to work without joining a union, even if majority of workers
voted for union
Use of agency fees to support union political activities must be
explained, and escrow account for amounts when dispute pending
re: use of fees for this purpose.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

Union is exclusive bargaining agent for employees

Collective bargaining covers whole process from initial
contract negotiations up through contract
administration

Set forth terms of contract for a given period


Most collective bargaining agreements contain dispute
resolution clauses (grievance arbitration clauses)
NLRA requires Good Faith Bargaining

Certain mandatory subjects, i.e., wages, hours, other terms
and conditions of employment, etc.

Can back up positions with strike by union or lockout by
employer
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 523 V. NLRB






Interstate Brands makes/distributes bakery products
Different distribution system handled different products
Employer consolidated distribution – sales distributors & reps would
handle all product lines. Meant union would now represent all
distribution workers, rather than only some workers
Rammage had been a Dolly Madison sales rep for 15 years before
consolidation (was not represented by union)
 Now he was represented by union, but placed at bottom of
seniority list
 This gave preference to workers that union had represented
before
 Result: Rammage was “endtailed” to bottom of distribution system
 Lost his regular route; was demoted
He complained to NLRB that union & employer were engaged in
“unfair labor practice”
Board held in Rammage’s favor. Union appealed.
(Continued)
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CASE
TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 523 V. NLRB

HELD: Affirmed.

When there is a unit merger, union and employer are
not permitted to “dovetail the seniority of employees
while endtailing” previously unrepresented employees.”

The fact that Rammage was endtailed PLUS demoted
(because he was not in the Union) suggests Union
caused Employer to discriminate against him

Rammage wins.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
CONCERTED ACTIVITIES

To promote productive collective bargaining, Congress provided certain
activities to be protected.

Concerted Activities: Employer & union must be able to back up positions


Union can strike; employer can lock out workers

Each side may do other activities to place pressure on the other side
Protected Activities: Right to engage in concerted activities for mutual aid or
protection


i.e. Most union organizing efforts or refusal to work due to unreasonable
hazards or concerns re: working conditions
Unprotected Activities: Threats or acts of violence not protected

Employers may fire employees for insubordination, disobedience or
disloyalty unless activity is part of protected concerted activity

Primary boycott (strike against employer whose collective bargaining
agreement is in question) is legal

Secondary boycott (when union uses economic pressure to force others
to stop doing business with an employer not directly involved in primary
labor dispute) is illegal
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.
EMPLOYER ECONOMIC RESPONSES




Employers may not retaliate against employees for
engaging in protected activities
Have right to use some economic pressure
May lock out employees until dispute with union is settled
 Lockout is usually a defensive move
 Okay if in an effort to promote settlement or protect plant
or its materials
Replacement of employees by non-union workers can be
okay
 If collective bargaining agreement expires with no
agreement to a new contract and union calls for strike,
then the employer can hire new workers and keep using
existing union workers who cross picket lines.
©2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible website, in whole or in part.