Posts tagged Ninth Circuit
Ninth Circuit Affirms Bargaining Order in Cemex Without Opining on NLRB’s Cemex Framework
April 25, 2026 // The Ninth Circuit could have joined the Sixth Circuit in rejecting the Cemex Framework outright, or it could have affirmed the Cemex Framework, which would have established a circuit split and set the stage for Supreme Court review. By choosing to do neither, the Ninth Circuit’s decision means the Board’s authority to issue bargaining orders under the Cemex Framework will remain unsettled. In the meantime, employers outside of the Sixth Circuit (Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee) should be aware that the Board will likely continue to enforce the union-friendly Cemex Framework (as it did after Brown-Forman). Dinsmore’s labor and employment attorneys will continue tracking these developments closely and provide updates as courts weigh in on the future of the Cemex Framework.
A Republican-Led NLRB May Soon Revisit Expanded Remedies and Other Labor Precedents
October 30, 2025 // The HELP Committee’s approvals signal a likely realignment in the months ahead but not an immediate one, as it remains unknown as to when or whether the NLRB will have a quorum. A new NLRB majority may act quickly once seated to revisit recent precedents—not only Thryv, but also rules governing joint-employer status, independent-contractor classifications and union election procedures. The coming months will be a period of heightened uncertainty for employers navigating ongoing unfair labor practice matters.
Trader Joe’s Bags A Victory At The Ninth Circuit
October 2, 2025 // Trader Joe’s had also asserted a dilution by blurring claim against the union, a claim the district court also dismissed on the basis that Trader Joe’s United’s use of the Trader Joe’s mark constituted nominative fair use. But unfortunately for the union, it had never raised this issue in its briefing before the district court. As such, Trader Joe’s never had the opportunity to test this theory and the Ninth Circuit held that the district court again erred in dismissing the dilution claim.
Lower courts ignore Supreme Court precedent to force union payments
August 2, 2025 // The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to answer that question. In an amicus brief filed July 24, the two organizations ask the Court to reaffirm and enforce the constitutional standard it set in the 2018 Janus v. AFSCME decision: that no money may be taken from a public employee’s paycheck for a union without the employee’s clear and affirmative consent. The brief supports two public workers who are respectively suing the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees as well as the International Union of Operating Engineers. Marcus Todd and Terry Klee
Truckers tell Ninth Circuit that California law unfairly bans independent contractor drivers
April 10, 2025 // Though a business-to-business exemption is available under the law, the association says members can't apply because they have to follow contradictory federal law that says trucking companies need to have exclusive control over trucks involved in interstate commerce. “One of the requirements of the business-to-business exemption is that the worker be free from the control of the business. Leased owner-operators in inter-state commerce must comply with federal regulations called the Truth In Leasing regulations which require the motor carrier to have exclusive possession and control of the vehicle and the operation of that vehicle in inter-state commerce. Whatever the scope of that control is it can’t be squared with the B2B requirement that the worker be free from control. It’s irreconcilable,” Cullen said.
Government Unions Can’t Keep Forcing Public Employees to Pay Up
December 22, 2022 //
Las Vegas Police Officer Urges Supreme Court to Hear Case Battling Union’s Unconstitutional Dues Scheme
November 22, 2022 // Las Vegas police officer Melodie DePierro has submitted a petition asking the United States Supreme Court to hear her lawsuit defending her First Amendment right to abstain from paying dues to a union she does not support. DePierro is receiving free legal representation from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation staff attorneys. DePierro, a Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD) officer, contends in the lawsuit that officials of the Las Vegas Police Protective Association (PPA) union seized dues money from her paycheck in violation of her First Amendment rights pursuant to a so-called “window period” specified in the union contract. PPA officials’ “window period” scheme prohibits police officers from opting out of union financial support for over 90% of the year. DePierro never consented to – nor was ever informed of – this limitation.
Lawsuit claiming public-sector employees must be informed of Janus rights dismissed
April 12, 2022 // Judge John F. Kness of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed an Illinois teacher’s lawsuit claiming that, under the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, public-sector unions are obligated to inform prospective members of their right not to join or pay fees to a union.