Skip to main content

The NLRB public website is scheduled to undergo routine maintenance from Friday, November 21, 2025, at 11:00 PM ET (8:00 PM PT) until Monday, November 24, 2025, at 6:00 AM ET. From Friday night at 11:00 pm ET through Saturday morning at about 9:00 am ET, E-Filing will not be available. From Saturday through Monday morning, the E-Filing applications (E-Filing, Online Charge and Petition, and My Account Portal) may be periodically unavailable. We apologize for any inconvenience.
The NLRB reopened from shutdown status on November 13, 2025. Due dates to file or serve most documents were tolled during the period of the shutdown, although due dates cannot be tolled for filing and service of unfair labor practice charges, applications for awards of fees and other expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, and certain representation petitions. For documents where tolling applies, the terms are that for each day on which the Agency’s offices were closed for all or any portion of the day, one day is added to the time for filing or service of the document. If the new due date falls on a weekend or holiday, the new due date will be moved to the next business day. For example, if the original due date was October 7, 2025 and the shutdown lasted 43 days, the revised due date is November 19, 2025. See chart for revised due dates.

Breadcrumb

  1. Home

News & Publications

Newspapers

NLRB Judge finds union unlawfully caused discharge of HR manager

Office of Public Affairs

202-273-1991

publicinfo@nlrb.gov

www.nlrb.gov

An NLRB Administrative Law Judge has found that a labor union violated the National Labor Relations Act when it conditioned the granting of concessions in collective-bargaining with the discharge of a member of the employer’s negotiating team. 
In his decision issued Thursday, Judge Arthur Amchan found that Council 30 of the United Catering, Cafeteria and Vending Workers International Union unlawfully caused the employer, Awrey Bakeries, LLC, to fire its Director of Human Resources on the same day the union membership ratified a new contract.
The Union had represented employees at the Livonia, Michigan facility for decades, and was bargaining for a successor contract. After union members rejected the first proposal, which called for significant reductions in hourly pay rates and lay-offs, the union indicated that it could win membership support if the employer agreed to discharge two members of the negotiating team, including its HR Director. 
The revised contract proposal provided for the immediate termination of one top manager, and the termination of another manager within 60-days.
Judge Amchan noted that under well established Board precedent, unions and employers must deal with each other’s chosen representatives for the purposes of collective-bargaining, and that a union violates Section 8(b)(1)(B) of the Act when it takes action to interfere with the employer’s representatives in order to adversely effect the manner in which they perform their duties. 
The Judge rejected the union’s arguments that the evidence did not establish a nexus between the union’s conduct and the HR Director’s functions as the employer’s collective bargaining representative.  Instead he determined that the evidence presented at the hearing showed  a sufficient link, assuming such a showing was required to establish the violation. 
Since the union’s unlawful coercion was at least a contributing factor in the discharge, it must pay the HR Director any wages and benefits lost as a result of the union’s actions.