Posts tagged amicus brief
Commentary: NLRB v. EEOC: Damned if you fire, damned If you don’t
February 28, 2024 // The concern is not theoretical. The EEOC has told the NLRB not to be too lenient regarding hostile rhetoric. The EEOC argued in a 2019 amicus brief, in a case called General Motors v. Robison that “[E]mployers must address racist or sexist conduct that violates Title VII [of the Civil Rights Act of 1964], and may need to do so even before the conduct becomes actionable in order to avoid liability for negligence … the EEOC urges the NLRB to consider a standard that permits employers to address such conduct, including by disciplining employees, as appropriate.” The case involved a worker directing racially charged language at a supervisor. In short, companies can find themselves trapped in a damned-if-you-fire, damned-if-you-don’t situation between two powerful regulatory agencies. Because regulators are supposed to issue clear rules of behavior, this is troubling. Businesses can’t follow the rules if they can’t know what the rules are. The public is entitled to have agencies require mutually consistent standards of behavior before they start enforcing them on the rest of us.
Seattle Mariners Employee Fights Biden Labor Board Cemex Decision Upending Right to Vote in Secret on Union ‘Representation’
February 13, 2024 // Under Cemex, an employer who declines to recognize a union is required to quickly ask the NLRB to hold a secret ballot election. But the NLRB doesn’t have to grant that request. A union can easily prompt the NLRB to cancel an employee vote (or even overturn an election that doesn’t go in the union’s favor) by filing charges against the company and showing the employer committed an unfair labor practice during the “critical period” leading up to the election.
The Impacts of Chevron Deference on Labor and Industry
February 7, 2024 // The Amicus brief alleges that the Chevron doctrine has enabled the NLRB’s “unworkable track record of frequent flip-flopping,” due in part to a consistently changing Board. According to the filing by CDW, “the Board’s membership is subject to frequent and continued change, and whenever a new Board majority disagrees with a prior precedent, it often overrules that precedent.” Additionally, “it is customary (though not mandated by statute) that no more than three of the five members will belong to the President’s political party.” This means each President can guarantee a majority of the Board will share his ideological priorities. The CDW argues this has created instability as rules are constantly changing with each new Board.
OOIDA lends support in case against AB5
January 30, 2024 // The two trucking groups argue that the law eliminates the independent contractor driver business model in the trucking industry and that it violates the U.S. and California constitutions. OOIDA, which is serving as an intervenor in a case against the state’s worker classification law, told the court in its Oct. 27 reply brief that AB5 needlessly causes genuine independent contractors to be reclassified as employees. “AB5 discriminates against and imposes undue burdens on interstate commerce in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause, and the disparate treatment of AB5’s business-to-business and construction exemptions violates the U.S. and California constitutions’ equal protection clauses,” OOIDA wrote
Political Spending by Public-Sector Unions Is Deep Blue
December 19, 2023 // Nearly $160 million of that amount came from member contributions to their PACs. The rest of the political money came from union dues. It’s not possible to get an equally clear picture where that money went. David Osborne, senior fellow of labor policy at the Commonwealth Foundation and a co-author of the report, is troubled by the lack of transparency. But he says there are signs that, as with the PAC contributions, union dues are disproportionately supporting progressive causes. He’s concerned that union leaders are thus making choices about political spending that don’t reflect the priorities of all union members. Osborne recognizes that as many as 60 or 70 percent of public-sector union members might be Democrats. But only 4 percent of union PAC dollars went to Republican causes. “That imbalance seems to me to be something more than paying their dues to the government,” he says. “Instead, there seems to be an agenda that members have very little control over.”
Buffalo Starbucks Baristas Blast National Labor Relations Board’s Move to Trap Workers in Union at Court of Appeals
November 29, 2023 // “Given the biases of the current Board, it is disheartening ― but not surprising ― to see the NLRB claim Cortes’ petition is the product of Starbucks’ alleged unfair labor practices,” the brief states. “Its own records show that nothing could be further from the truth. In reality, Cortes collected her petition because of the Union’s anti-employee behavior.” The employees’ brief also contends that the relief NLRB lawyers are seeking from the Second Circuit – a 10(j) injunction under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that will force Starbucks managers into working with SBWU union bosses to craft a monopoly bargaining contract – is extreme. Such injunctions can only be ordered when the harm done to workers in their absence would be “irreparable.” Foundation attorneys argue that the fact that Cortes and other employees have attempted to decertify does not make any injuries suffered by the union “irreparable.” “The NLRB’s argument it needs an injunction to suppress decertification efforts already underway―which have already garnered majority support―is a tacit admission it is seeking to alter the status quo, not preserve it,” states the brief.
Employee Advocate Blasts Proposed Labor Department Rule Rigging Visa Program in Favor of Union Organizers
November 26, 2023 // Foundation attorneys have a track record of providing free legal aid to farmworkers who want to free themselves from the control of union bosses. In 2016, Foundation staff attorneys won a decision upholding Pennsylvania-based Kaolin Mushroom Farms employees’ decisive vote to remove union bosses who had argued in favor of maintaining a seven-year restriction on the workers’ right to vote. Foundation attorneys have also filed amicus briefs in recent years defending California and North Carolina agricultural employees’ Right to Work in various cases. The Department of Labor’s notice of rulemaking on temporary farmworkers comes as the Biden Administration is making a full court press to expand union boss legal privileges across the country. The Biden National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is currently in rulemaking devising regulations that will make it more difficult for American private sector workers to exercise their right to remove unwanted unions, while giving union officials more tools to gain power in a workplace without even a vote.
It’s Time to Stop Passing the Buck—to Thieves and Forgers
November 21, 2023 //
AB5 needlessly reclassifies genuine independent contractors, OOIDA says
November 8, 2023 // OOIDA, which is serving as an intervenor in a case against the state’s worker classification law, told the court in its Oct. 27 reply brief that AB5 needlessly causes genuine independent contractors to be reclassified as employees. “AB5 discriminates against and imposes undue burdens on interstate commerce in violation of the dormant Commerce Clause, and the disparate treatment of AB5’s business-to-business and construction exemptions violates the U.S. and California constitutions’ equal protection clauses,” OOIDA wrote.
National Right to Work Foundation Urges SCOTUS to Reverse NLRB Decision Letting ILA Union Wipe Out Nonunion Port Jobs
October 29, 2023 // The brief spells out the dire consequences of the ILA union’s maneuver for Leatherman’s 270 state employees, who are protected by state law from monopoly union control. It explains that South Carolina spent over $1 billion to develop the terminal, but the ILA union’s scheme, if allowed to continue, would require South Carolina to both fire all the nonunion state employees of the port, and turn control of crane jobs over to a private contractor with an ILA union contract. The devastating effects for current employees wouldn’t stop there if the ILA is victorious in the case. The brief points out that, even if fired state workers were to seek new employment at Leatherman with a private contractor under the union’s control, the ILA would likely prioritize its existing workers far above the former state workers because of union seniority provisions and hiring hall referral rules.