Posts tagged tribunals
NLRB’s in-house tribunal undermines fairness and rule of law
February 25, 2025 // Nick felt he’d followed proper procedure and compiled thorough evidence to support his case. But none of it mattered. The NLRB doesn’t have to prosecute its allegations in a proper court of law. In fact, it doesn’t even have to go beyond its own walls. The agency’s general counsel filed the case in-house, applied the NLRB’s own rules (that toss aside standard rules of evidence), and held a hearing in front of an NLRB-employed administrative law judge (ALJ) at the NLRB’s offices. Any appeal of the ALJ’s decision goes to the NLRB itself. Unsurprisingly, the ALJ in Nick’s case ruled against the restaurant and ordered it to rehire the eight employees with backpay. The NLRB affirmed the ALJ’s decision, including her order to Hiran Management to compensate the employees for any “foreseeable” harm that purportedly resulted from the terminations. These so-called “compensatory damages” are not authorized under the National Labor Relations Act. But the NLRB “discovered” this authority in December 2022—90 years after the labor act was adopted.
Portland–Area Fred Meyer Employee Wins Dispute with UFCW Union Local 555 Over Illegal Union Threats
November 29, 2024 // As detailed in the charges, on August 30, 2024 the employees exercised their right to resign union membership and return to work. However, on September 24, 2024, and October 14 2024, respectively, UFCW union officials notified Vasquez and Schaffer that the union had started internal proceedings against them and that their presence would soon be required at a union “trial,” which is the first step towards imposing fines. If an employee is not a voluntary union member, he or she cannot be legally subjected to internal union discipline like the kind UFCW union officials attempted to impose. In such internal discipline tribunals, union bosses frequently levy punitive fines against workers amounting to thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars.