Summary of NLRB Decisions for Week of February 23 - 27, 2026

The Summary of NLRB Decisions is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to substitute for the opinions of the NLRB. Inquiries should be directed to the Office of the Executive Secretary at 202‑273‑1940.

Summarized Board Decisions

Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. d/b/a BFI Newby Island Recyclery and FPR-II, LLC d/b/a Leadpoint Business Services  (32-CA-160759 and 32-RC-109684; 374 NLRB No. 46)  Milpitas, CA, February 23, 2026.

In this test-of-certification case on second remand from the D.C. Circuit Court, the Board affirmed its prior determination in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc. d/b/a BFI Newby Island Recyclery, 362 NLRB 1599 (2015) (Browning-Ferris I), to find that the Respondent, Browning-Ferris, is a joint employer of employees in the petitioned-for unit, and, thus, violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by refusing to bargain with the Union. In Browning-Ferris I, the Board announced a new joint-employer standard and retroactively applied it to conclude that Browning-Ferris and Leadpoint Business Services were joint employers of the Leadpoint employees in the petitioned-for unit.  The Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Board’s decision and remanded the case with directions to clarify the new standard and how it should be applied to the facts of this case and consider whether it was appropriate to apply the new standard retroactively. 

On first remand, in a 2020 decision, the Board instead found that Browning-Ferris was not a joint employer, applying pre-Browning-Ferris I precedent, on the basis that any retroactive application of the Browning-Ferris I standard would be manifestly unjust. See Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., d/b/a BFI Newby Island Recyclery (Browning-Ferris III), 369 NLRB No. 139 (2020).  The District of Columbia Circuit rejected that position, which resulted in a second remand by the Court. 

In light of the Court’s remand instructions, which are law of the case, the Board clarified the indirect-control and “meaningful collective bargaining” elements of the Browning-Ferris I joint-employer standard, found it proper to apply this clarified Browning-Ferris I standard in the instant case, and applying this clarified standard, found that Browning-Ferris was a joint employer of the Leadpoint employees. The Board noted that, in 2020, rulemaking established a clarified version of the joint-employer standard that was in place prior to Browning-Ferris I and that cases arising after the effective date of the 2020 Rule are not affected by this decision.  See Joint Employer Status Under the National Labor Relations Act, 85 Fed. Reg. 11,184 (Feb. 26, 2020) (“2020 Rule”).  Accordingly, the Board reaffirmed the original conclusion that Browning-Ferris violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and ordered it to recognize and bargain with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Leadpoint employees in the petitioned-for unit.

Charge filed by Sanitary Truck Drivers and Helpers Local 350, International Brotherhood of Teamsters.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated. 

***

GE Appliances, a Haier Company  (09-CA-284214 and 09-CA-298179; 374 NLRB No. 47) Louisville, KY, February 24, 2026.

The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge’s conclusion that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1), within the meaning of Section 8(d), when it increased certain employees’ contractually established pay without the Union’s consent. Noting the absence of exceptions to the judge’s finding of both a unilateral change and a midterm modification on the same facts, the Board also adopted the judge’s conclusion that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by unilaterally changing employees’ pay. The Board, however, declined to order the novel monetary remedy of extending the pay increases to all unit employees sought by the General Counsel and the Union.  Additionally, the Board adopted the judge’s conclusion that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by unreasonably delaying in providing information requested by the Union. 

Charges filed by International Union of Electronic, Electrical, Salaried, Machine and Furniture Workers AFL–CIO (IUE) Communications Workers of America, AFL–CIO (CWA), IUE/CWA, Local 83761.  Administrative Law Judge Kimberly Sorg-Graves issued her decision on January 26, 2023.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

                                                                         ***                                                                 

New Vista Nursing and Rehabilitation Center  (22-CA-316866; 374 NLRB No. 43)  Newark, NJ, February 24, 2026.

The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s noncompliance with the provisions of the parties’ bilateral informal settlement agreement.  The case alleges Section 8(a)(5) and (1) violations, including failure to meet and bargain with the Union and failure to provide information necessary for and relevant to the Union’s performance of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit.  The Board ordered the Respondent to comply with the unmet provisions of the settlement agreement. 

Charge filed by 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated. 

              ***

Coreslab Structures (Tulsa) Inc.  (14–CA–248354 and 14–CA–248812; 374 NLRB No. 49)  Tulsa, OK, February 25, 2026.

On remand from the Tenth Circuit, the Board remands this case to the Regional Director of Region 14 for further proceedings consistent with the court’s Order.  In the underlying decision, Coreslab Structures (Tulsa) Inc., 372 NLRB No. 31 (2022), the Board found various violations of the Act, including, inter alia, that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5), (3), and (1) by failing to make contractually required pension contributions on behalf of unit employees who were not dues-paying members of the Union; Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by offering unit employees who were not members of the Union a profit-sharing plan without providing the Union notice and opportunity to bargain; and Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by excluding dues-paying Union members from the profit-sharing plan.  In its make-whole remedy, the Board ordered the Respondent to make all delinquent contributions to the pension fund on behalf of unit employees that it had excluded from the pension plan and to provide back pay in the form of profit-sharing benefits to unit employees whom it had excluded from the profit-sharing plan.  The Board did not order that the remedial contributions and benefits be offset by those that the employees had already received under the plans in which they had been enrolled.  The Board also ordered the Respondent to rescind the unlawful unilateral changes, notably the profit-sharing plan, on request by the Union.  

On review, the court enforced the Board’s unfair-labor practice findings but found that the Board had exceeded its statutory authority by ordering backpay without offset for the unlawfully withheld pension and profit-sharing payments.  The court also found that the Board had exceeded its authority by ordering the Respondent to retain the profit-sharing program unless the Union requested its rescission, explaining that the Board could not dictate the terms of the parties’ contract, and that it was up to the parties to bargain over the decision to retain the profit-sharing program alongside, or in lieu of, the pension program.  In its judgment, the court provided an Order and new notice comporting with its decision.  The Board accepted the court’s remand and remands the case to the Regional Director to enforce the court’s Order.  

Charges filed by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 627, AFL-CIO.  Administrative Law Judge Robert A. Ringler issued his decision on February 11, 2021.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated. 

               ***

Performance Plumbing, LLC  (27-CA-331749 and 27-CA-332447; 374 NLRB No. 48)  Nampa, ID, February 26, 2026.

The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the complaint.  The Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by threatening employees with termination if they discuss their wages with coworkers; interrogating employees about their union activities and the union activities of their coworkers; promising benefits to employees if they refrained from supporting the Union and in order to discourage other employees from doing so; threatening employees with job loss for supporting the Union; increasing employee benefits by providing employees with paid time off and holiday pay; refusing to consider for hire, or hire, applicants because they formed, joined, or assisted the Union in concerted activities, and to discourage employees from engaging in these activities; and laying off or otherwise discriminating against employees because they formed, joined, or assisted the Union in concerted activities, and to discourage employees from engaging in these activities.

Charges filed by United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 296.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

                                                                                                    ***

Longmont United Hospital  (27–CA–296153; 374 NLRB No. 52)  Longmont, CO, February 26, 2026.

In an earlier decision, the Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment in a test-of-certification case and severed for further consideration the issue of whether the Board should overrule Ex-Cell-O Corp., 185 NLRB 107 (1970) and adopt a remedy that would require employers to compensate employees “for the lost opportunity to engage in collective bargaining at the time and in the manner contemplated by the Act.” After further consideration, the Board declined to depart from its longstanding remedial practice.

Charge filed by National Nurses Organizing Committee/National Nurses United (NNOC/NNU).   Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

                                                                                                    ***

Solution One Industries, Inc.  (09-CA-293349; 374 NLRB No. 50)  Lexington, KY, February 27, 2026.

On a stipulated record, the Board found that the Respondent, by failing to consider five grievances as settled, committed an unlawful midterm contract modification.  In so finding, the Board determined that the Respondent did not have a “sound arguable basis” for its position that it was not required to consider the five grievances as settled under the collective-bargaining agreement.

Charge filed by International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

            ***

New World Construction, Inc. (04–CA–305091, et al.; 374 NLRB No. 45) Baltimore, MD, February 27, 2026.

The Board granted the General Counsel’s Motion for Default Judgment based on the Respondent’s failure to file an answer to the complaint.  The Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5), (3), and (1) by discharging employees for engaging in union and protected concerted activity; by ceasing abiding by the terms and conditions of employment contained in the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement; and by failing to furnish the Union with relevant requested information.

Charges filed by Delaware Laborers’ Local 199, Laborers International Union of North America, AFL–CIO.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

      ***

Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases

R Cases

Walgreens Company  (19-RC-348046)  Vancouver, WA, February 23, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision on Objections and Certification of Representative finding no substantial issues warranting review. Union—The Pharmacy Guild, a/w International Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO. Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated. 

Unifi Aviation, LLC  (08-RC-360055)  Cleveland, OH, February 24, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Certification of Representative as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  In denying review, the Board (1) rejected the Employer’s argument that that the Regional Director lacked the authority to continue processing this petition in the absence of a Board quorum; (2) agreed with the Regional Director’s conclusion that the National Mediation Board would not assert jurisdiction over this Employer, but declined to rely on the Regional Director’s analysis concerning the Board’s non-acquiescence policy; and (3) noted that, contrary to the Employer’s suggestion, the Board did not “adopt” Swissport Cargo Services, LP, 52 NMB 25, but merely deferred to it.  Members Murphy and Mayer also rejected the Employer’s contention that the election must be set aside based on the Board’s holding in Amazon.com Services, 373 NLRB No. 136 (2024), an unfair labor practice case, but expressed now view on whether that case was correctly decided.  Petitioner—International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local 1363.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Unifi Aviation, LLC  (19-RC-364995)  Anchorage, AK, February 24, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision on Challenged Ballots and Objections, Order Directing Hearing, and Notice of Hearing as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  In denying review, the Board (1) rejected the Employer’s argument that that the Regional Director lacked the authority to continue processing this petition in the absence of a Board quorum; (2) agreed with the Regional Director’s conclusion that the National Mediation Board would not assert jurisdiction over this Employer, but declined to rely on the Regional Director’s analysis concerning the Board’s non-acquiescence policy; and (3) noted that, contrary to the Employer’s suggestion, the Board did not “adopt” Swissport Cargo Services, LP, 52 NMB 25, but merely deferred to it.  Members Murphy and Mayer also rejected the Employer’s contention that the election must be set aside based on the Board’s holding in Amazon.com Services, 373 NLRB No. 136 (2024), an unfair labor practice , but expressed now view on whether that case was correctly decided.  Petitioner—International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Centerra Group, LLC  (05-RC-313970)  Baltimore, MD, February 25, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Direction of Election (in which the Regional Director found that the petitioned-for classifications are not supervisors under the Act), as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  Petitioner—Federal Contract Guards of America (FCGOA).  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Satellite Healthcare, Inc. (32-RC-370183) Oakland, CA, February 26, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Certification of Representative as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  In denying review, the Board rejected the Employer’s argument that that the Regional Director lacked the authority to continue processing this petition in the absence of a Board quorum and also stated that there was no need to remand the case based on the Regional Director’s inadvertent mischaracterization of the Employer’s operations or offer of proof.  Members Murphy and Mayer also rejected the Employer’s contention that the election must be set aside based on the Board’s holding in Amazon.com Services, 373 NLRB No. 136 (2024), an unfair labor practice case, but expressed now view on whether that case was correctly decided.  Petitioner—Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers – West.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Unifi Aviation, LLC  (32-RC-372564)  Fresno, CA, February 26, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Certification of Representative as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  In denying review, the Board agreed with the Regional Director’s conclusion that the National Mediation Board would not assert jurisdiction over this Employer, but declined to rely on the Regional Director’s analysis concerning the Board’s non-acquiescence policy.  The Board also noted that, contrary to the Employer’s suggestion, the Board did not “adopt” Swissport Cargo Services, LP, 52 NMB 25, but merely deferred to it.  Petitioner—International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, District 142.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Satellite Healthcare, Inc.  (32-RC-373302)  Hollister, CA, February 27, 2026.  The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Certification of Representative as it raised no substantial issues warranting review.  Members Murphy and Mayer also rejected the Employer’s contention that the election must be set aside based on the Board’s holding in Amazon.com Services, 373 NLRB No. 136 (2024), an unfair labor practice case, but expressed no view on whether that case was correctly decided.  Petitioner—Service Employees International Union – United Healthcare Workers – West.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

C Cases

Hoffmann Brothers Heating and Air Conditioning, Inc. d/b/a Hoffmann Brothers  (14-CA-344872)  Brentwood, MO, February 23, 2026.  No exceptions having been filed to the January 5, 2026 decision of Administrative Law Judge Andrew S. Gollin’s finding that the Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices, the Board adopted the judge’s findings and conclusions, and ordered the Respondent to take the action set forth in the judge’s recommended Order.  Charge filed by International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers, Local Union No. 36.

Starbucks Corporation  (14-CA-294830, et al.) Nichols Hills, OK, February 26, 2026. The Board granted the General Counsel’s and the Union’s Requests for Special Permission to Appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s approval of a unilateral consent order. While these appeals were pending, the Board issued its decision in Metro Health, Inc. d/b/a Hospital Metropolitano Rio Piedras, 373 NLRB No. 89 (2024), overruling UPMC and its Subsidiary, UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside, 365 NLRB 1418 (2017), and ending retroactively its practice of allowing cases to be resolved through consent order. Accordingly, the Board revoked the consent order and remanded the proceeding to the judge for further processing. Charges filed by Workers United.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, its Territories and Canada, AFL-CIO, Local 127 (Upstage Center)  (16-CB-335527)  Pearland, TX, February 26, 2026.  The Board denied the Respondent’s Motions to Dismiss the Complaint.  The Board found that the Respondent had not demonstrated that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  Charge filed by an individual.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Refresco Beverages US, Inc.  (22-CA-294330 and 22-CA-294642)  Wharton, NJ, February 26, 2026.  The Board denied the Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Board’s Decision and Order, reported at 373 NLRB No. 148 (2024).  The Board found that the Respondent had not identified any material error or demonstrated extraordinary circumstances warranting reconsideration. The Board also denied as moot the Respondent’s request for a stay in the proceeding pending the resolution of the Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration. Charges filed by United Electric, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE), Local 115. Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Apple, Inc.  (10-CA-295915)  Atlanta, GA, February 27, 2026.  The Board granted the General Counsel’s Request for Special Permission to Appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s approval of a unilateral consent order. While this appeal was pending, the Board issued its decision in Metro Health, Inc. d/b/a Hospital Metropolitano Rio Piedras, 373 NLRB No. 89 (2024), overruling UPMC and its Subsidiary, UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside, 365 NLRB 1418 (2017), and ending retroactively its practice of allowing cases to be resolved through consent order. Accordingly, the Board revoked the consent order and remanded the proceeding to the judge for further processing.  Charge filed by Communications Workers of America.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Walmart Inc.  (06-CA-299058)  Baden, PA, February 27, 2026.  The Board granted the General Counsel’s Request for Special Permission to Appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s approval of a unilateral consent order. While this appeal was pending, the Board issued its decision in Metro Health, Inc. d/b/a Hospital Metropolitano Rio Piedras, 373 NLRB No. 89 (2024), overruling UPMC and its Subsidiary, UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside, 365 NLRB 1418 (2017), and ending retroactively its practice of allowing cases to be resolved through consent order. Accordingly, the Board revoked the consent order and remanded the proceeding to the judge for further processing. Charge filed by an individual.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Harmony Cares  (13-CA-307216)  Burr Ridge, IL, February 27, 2026. The Board granted the General Counsel’s Request for Special Permission to Appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s approval of a unilateral consent order. While this appeal was pending, the Board issued its decision in Metro Health, Inc. d/b/a Hospital Metropolitano Rio Piedras, 373 NLRB No. 89 (2024), overruling UPMC and its Subsidiary, UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside, 365 NLRB 1418 (2017), and ending retroactively its practice of allowing cases to be resolved through consent order. Accordingly, the Board revoked the consent order and remanded the proceeding to the judge for further processing.  Charge filed by an individual.  Members Prouty, Murphy, and Mayer participated.

Starbucks Corporation  (15-CA-304674, et al.) Memphis, TN, February 27, 2026.  No exceptions having been filed to the December 10, 2025 decision of Administrative Law Judge Geoffrey Carter’s finding that the Respondent had not engaged in certain unfair labor practices, the Board adopted the judge’s findings and conclusions and dismissed the complaint. Charges filed by Workers United.

***

Appellate Court Decisions

No Appellate Court Decisions involving Board Decisions to report.

 ***

Administrative Law Judge Decisions

Satellite Healthcare, Inc.  (20-CA-340738; JD(SF)–04–26)  San Francisco, CA.  Administrative Law Judge Brian D. Gee issued his decision on February 23, 2026.  Charge filed by Service Employees International Union, United Healthcare Workers—West.

                                                                                             ***

To have the NLRB’s Weekly Summary of Cases delivered to your inbox each week, please subscribe here.