Weekly Summary of NLRB Decisions for June 22 - 26, 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

No Published Decisions Issued.

***

Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases

R Cases

Laborers International Union of North America, Local 872, AFL–CIO (Various Employers, including the Employer-Members of Nevada Contractors Association)  (28-CB-239339, et al.)  Las Vegas, NV, June 22, 2026. The Board denied the Respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Board’s Decision and Order, reported at 374 NLRB No. 108 (2026).  The Board found that the Respondent had not identified any material error or demonstrated extraordinary circumstances warranting reconsideration.  Charges filed by individuals. Chairman Murphy and Member Mayer participated. Member Prouty, who is recused, was a member of the panel but did not participate in the decision on the merits.

The Queen’s Medical Center  (20-RC-359891) Honolulu, HI, June 24, 2026. The Board denied the Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Direction of Self-Determination Election as it raised no substantial issues warranting review. Petitioner—Hawaii Nurses’ Association, OPEIU Local 50. Chairman Murphy and Members Prouty and Mayer participated.

C Cases

Detrex Corporation, a Subsidiary of the Elco Corp., and a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Italmatch USA Corp.  (08-CA-343335)  Ashtabula, OH, June 23, 2026.  No exceptions having been filed to the May 6, 2026 decision of Administrative Law Judge Susannah Merritt’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 United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL–CIO, CLC.

Johns Hopkins Medical Associates, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Johns Hopkins Health System Corporation  (05-CA-319331 and 05-CA-322175)   Lutherville, MD, June 25, 2026.  No exceptions having been filed to the April 24, 2026 decision of Administrative Law Judge Arthur J. Amchan’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 individuals.

***

Appellate Court Decisions

Starbucks Corporation, Board No. 31-CA-299464 (reported at 374 NLRB No. 9) (5th Cir. June 23, 2026). 

In a published opinion, the Fifth Circuit enforced, in part, the Board’s order that issued against Starbucks for unfair labor practices committed in the weeks leading up to an election in July 2022 among its employees at a store in Sylmar, California.  After a majority of employees voted against representation by Workers United, the Union filed election objections and unfair-labor-practice charges.  After the complaint issued, the two proceedings were consolidated for hearing and decision.  The Board (Chairman McFerran and Members Prouty and Wilcox) found that Starbucks engaged in a variety of threats and other coercive actions in violation of Section 8(a)(1), and discharged an employee for his union activity in violation of Section 8(a)(3) and (1).  Finding that Starbucks’ conduct interfered with the employees’ free choice, the Board set aside the election and severed the representation case, remanding it for a second election.

On review, the Court upheld two of the Board’s unlawful-threat findings and a finding of unlawful interrogation, but held that the Board’s remaining Section 8(a)(1) findings were unsupported by substantial evidence.  On the discharge, the Court viewed differently the evidence the Board relied on in finding animus under Wright Line, stating that the Board’s comparator analysis was faulty, and that without it, the conclusion rested “exclusively on timing” in contravention of in-circuit precedent, citing NLRB v. Arkema, Inc., 710 F.3d 308 (5th Cir. 2013).  Given its rejection of the discharge finding, the Court held that it need not address Starbucks’ challenge to the Board’s remedies under Thryv, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 22 (2022), enforcement denied on other grounds, 102 F.4th 727 (5th Cir. 2024).  Regarding Starbucks’ request that the Court review the Board’s determination to order a second election, the Court explained that it was without jurisdiction to consider the issue, citing Boire v. Greyhound Corp., 376 U.S. 473 (1964), but that “Starbucks will be able to seek review if a future order of the NLRB compels it to bargain after the second election.”  Accordingly, the Court remanded the case to the Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with its opinion. 

The Court’s opinion is here.

***

Administrative Law Judge Decisions

Amazon.com Services, LLC   (20-CA-353378; JD-39-26) San Francisco, CA.  Administrative Law Judge Michael P. Silverstein issued his decision on June 22, 2026.  Charge filed by Teamsters Amazon National Negotiating Committee, International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

American President Lines, LLC and APL Marine Services, Ltd. (21–CA–347811; JD-40-26)  Long Beach, CA.  Administrative Law Judge Christal J. Key issued her decision on June 22, 2026.  Charge filed by International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots. 

Endurance Environmental Solutions, LLC  (28–CA–278714, et al.; JD-41-26)  Rosemont, IL.  Administrative Law Judge Geoffrey Carter issued his decision on June 24, 2026.  Charges filed by Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers Local 631, a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

                                                                                                ***

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