Whole Foods Market, Inc.,
363 NLRB No. 87
This case discusses whether the Employer unlawfully maintained rules in its general information guide prohibiting recording in the workplace without prior management approval.
363 NLRB No. 83
This case discusses whether the Employer’s maintenance and enforcement of an arbitration policy that forecloses access to court and that requires employees to individually arbitrate employment-related disputes is unlawful under D.R. Horton, 357 NLRB 2277 (2012), and Murphy Oil USA, 361 NLRB No. 72 (2014), even though the policy permits employees to file claims or charges with Federal agencies, which may then choose to pursue a judicial remedy on behalf of employees as a group.
ST. FRANCIS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,
363 NLRB No. 69
This case discusses whether deferral to arbitration is appropriate for Section 8(a)(3) and (1) claims that the Employer unlawfully disciplined and discharged a union steward and her unit member for activity related to the processing of the member’s grievance.
Olean General Hospital,
363 NLRB No. 62
This case discusses whether the Employer—a hospital—had a duty to bargain with the Union both over the decision to implement a training program that employed unit nurses as trainers of nursing students, and over the effects of that decision.
Buchanan Marine, L.P.,
363 NLRB No. 58
This case discusses whether the Employer’s tugboat captains are supervisors within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act.
Classic Valet Parking, Inc.,
363 NLRB No. 23
This case discusses whether—in a mail-ballot election in which 10 counted ballots were cast for the Union and 6 were cast against representation—the Regional Director properly excluded from the tally 10 ballots that were received by the Region after the tally was completed.
363 NLRB No. 13
This case discusses whether canvassers—who solicit door-to-door for contributions to fund the operating expenses of a nonprofit organization that collects and distributes unsalable food to low-income individuals—are employees or independent contractors.
MSR Industrial Services, LLC,
363 NLRB No. 1
This case discusses whether the Employer—in a Section 8(f) relationship with the Union—could lawfully make unilateral changes upon contract expiration without giving advance notice to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service as required by Section 8(d).
UPMC and its Subsidiaries UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside and Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Single Empl,
362 NLRB 1704
This case discusses whether the Employers unlawfully: (1) maintained a solicitation policy that prohibits employees’ use of the Employers’ electronic messaging systems to engage in solicitation; and (2) promulgated and maintained an email policy that prohibits use of the Employers’ electronic messaging systems to solicit employees to support any group or organization unless sanctioned by the Employers’ executive management.
GVS Properties, LLC,
362 NLRB 1771
This case discusses whether the appropriate time to determine successorship status—in cases where a new employer is required, pursuant to a state or local work retention statute, to retain its predecessor’s employees for a specific period of time—is when the new employer assumes control over the business and hires the predecessor’s employees pursuant to the retention statute, or after the mandatory retention period has ended.
On Assignment Staffing Services, Inc.,
362 NLRB 1672
This case discusses: (1) whether, consistent with D.R. Horton, 357 NLRB 2277 (2012), and Murphy Oil USA, 361 NLRB No. 72 (2014), the Employer could lawfully require its employees, as a condition of employment, to be bound to an agreement that limits resolution of all employment-related clams to individual arbitration, unless employees opt-out of the agreement before it takes effect 10 days after receiving it; and (2) whether the agreement would be unlawful even assuming that the opt-out provision renders the arbitration agreement non-mandatory.
Manhattan Beer Distributors LLC,
362 NLRB 1731
This case discusses whether the Employer violated Section 8(a)(1) by discharging an employee for refusing to take a drug test without having a union representative present.
The Boeing Company,
362 NLRB 1789
This case discusses whether the Employer’s revised confidentiality notice to employees participating in human resources investigation that substituted “we recommend that you refrain from discussing” cases under investigation with coworkers for “you are directed not to discuss this case” with coworkers violates Section 8(a)(1).
Lincoln Lutheran of Racine,
362 NLRB 1655
This case discusses whether an employer’s obligation to check off union dues continues or terminates after expiration of a collective-bargaining agreement that establishes such an arrangement.
DPI Secuprint Inc.,
362 NLRB 1407
This case discusses the appropriateness of a bargaining unit that includes the hourly pre-press, digital press, offset bindery, digital bindery, and shipping and receiving employees at the Employer’s commercial printing facility, but that excludes the hourly offset-press employees.
INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTORS SKANSKA INC.,
362 NLRB 1396
This case discusses whether a Union violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) and 8(b)(2) by failing to provide a union member with adequate notice of his dues delinquency before informing his Employer that he was no longer a member in good standing and thus ineligible for rehire.
362 NLRB 1350
This case discusses whether the Board should assert jurisdiction over a private university’s football players who receive grant-in-aid scholarships.
200 East 81st Restaurant Corp. d/b/a Beyoglu,
362 NLRB 1238
This case discusses whether a single employee who files an employment-related class or collective action is engaged in protected concerted activity.
Fresenius USA Manufacturing,
362 NLRB 1065
This case discusses whether the Employer lawfully discharged an employee for his unprotected dishonesty during the Employer’s investigation of his conduct—writing vulgar and arguably threatening statements on union newsletters left in an employee breakroom—even assuming, without deciding, that the handwritten statements retained the Act’s protection.
E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.,
362 NLRB 843
This case discusses when a make-whole remedy is available to an employee discharged for misconduct that occurred during an unlawful Weingarten interview.
362 NLRB 859
This case discusses whether the Employer’s bargaining proposal—which would allow daily cross-utilization of nonunit employees to perform unit work—was a mandatory subject of bargaining over which the Employer could bargain to impasse.
362 NLRB 736
This case discusses whether the Employer lawfully insisted to impasse on proposals to modify the expired supplemental collective-bargaining agreement at the Employer’s Memphis plant or whether it unlawfully insisted to impasse on and locked out employees in support of proposals that effectively sought to modify the master collective-bargaining agreement that covered four of the Employer’s plants, including the Memphis plant. Under the Employer’s proposals, all employees hired to perform unit work would be classified as “casual employees” excluded from the wage rates, benefits, and overtime premiums granted to regular employees under the master agreement.
Americold Logistics, LLC,
362 NLRB 493
This case discusses whether, under Lamons Gasket Co., 357 NLRB No. 72 (2011), in voluntary recognition cases, the “reasonable period of bargaining” under the recognition bar runs from the date of recognition or from the start of bargaining.
Flyte Tyme Worldwide,
362 NLRB 393
This case discusses whether the Board should withdraw a pending unfair labor practice charge based on a settlement agreement that does not address or remedy allegations that the Employer violated Section 8(a)(1) by maintaining and enforcing its Arbitration Agreement Policy that requires employees to individually arbitrate all employment-related claims or disputes, and to waive their right to maintain collective or class actions in all forums.
Mezonos Maven Bakery,
362 NLRB 360
This case discusses whether Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), precludes the Board from ordering the conditional reinstatement of employees who, at the time they were unlawfully discharged by the Employer, lacked proper documentation to work in the United States.
362 NLRB 303
This case discusses whether the Employer unlawfully threatened a union steward with suspension for using his notes during a Weingarten investigatory interview.
362 NLRB 222
This case discusses whether the Board should defer to an arbitration panel’s finding that the display of informational picket signs from windows of employees’ personal vehicles parked on the Employer’s property constituted picketing in contravention of the “no-picketing” provision of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement.
Hawaiian Dredging Construction Company, Inc.,
362 NLRB 81
This case discusses whether the Employer violated Section 8(a)(3) when it discharged all employees who were Union members when the Employer terminated its Section 8(f) bargaining relationship with that Union.