Skip to content

Tag: Union Organizing

Top 10 Post COVID-19/Coronavirus Employment Law Issues

Image of a sign that says that "the world is temporarily closed" to demonstrate that most activities are shutdown until the post COVID-19 recovery begins.
Photo by Edwin Hooper on Unsplash

Businesses are slowly returning to normal from the COVID-19/Coronavirus pandemic. However, there are still a number of issues that are employers are facing. Of course, the most important issue for many employers is making sure that their business survives. Unfortunately, many businesses are also facing another issue: lawsuits. The potential liability for companies is continuing to accelerate. Here are the most likely lawsuits, administrative proceedings, and labor/employment law issues that employers will face in a post COVID-19 workplace.

1. WARN Act Lawsuits

As I stated in a previous article, the WARN Act generally requires employers with 100 or more employees to provide 60 days’ notice before the closure of a business or a mass layoff.

With the numerous layoffs that have occurred, accelerating bankruptcies, lockdowns continuing in many states, and businesses operating at reduced capacity or shutting down there will be a number of people that will not come back to work. Many people suspect that 40% of the layoffs will be permanent. 40 million people have lost their jobs. Unfortunately, the sheer number of layoffs means that there will be some layoffs that were not properly done. WARN Act lawsuits will accelerate.  

2. Worker Safety Lawsuits and OSHA Complaints

As I stated in my post about essential workers, employees want to be safe. Many are filing OSHA complaints and lawsuits because they do not feel safe.

a. OSHA Complaints Are Increasing

OSHA has issued over 5,000 complaints related to COVID-19. There will be a number of OSHA complaints that will continue after businesses begin to reopen. Many employees are concerned about their safety especially those that are vulnerable or work in high risk jobs. Companies should expect that there will continue to be a number of OSHA complaints due to companies not following all the safety protocols that OSHA and the CDC have put out. As a reminder here are the protocols from OSHA and the CDC have been released:

There are two important steps to employee safety and COVID-19. First companies need to follow the guidance to the extent that it applies at their workplace. Second, companies need to communicate with their employees about the safety steps. Employees need to know the procedures that they need to follow.  Employees also need to have channels that they can use to report workplace problems and safety concerns. Finally, employees that know that their company is taking steps so that they feel safe in the workplace are less likely to pursue lawsuits or complaints against a company.

b. Lawsuits About Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

A number of employers have been sued for not providing enough personal protective equipment for employees including one against Smithfield  and another against a hospital.

The Smithfield plaintiffs’ suit was dismissed because they did not follow the proper channels for pursuing their claim (they should have gone through OSHA). While similar lawsuits are unlikely to succeed, companies should expect employees to continue to use all legal channels when they are not satisfied with the protective measures that their employer has taken.

3. Worker’s Compensation Lawsuits

Employers should expect a surge of worker’s compensation claims related to the coronavirus. It may be difficult for many employees to demonstrate that they got sick at work, but some states have made this easier through executive orders or other legislation that have basically enacted a rebuttable presumption that essential workers are presumed to have been infected while on the job. Bloomberg has a nice chart of which states have enacted such laws. For workers that are not essential or are not in one of the 8 states that have enacted such a law or regulation, it will be difficult to show that the employee actually got COVID-19 at work. This fact should reduce the number of successful claims in those states.

There continues to be conversations in Congress about protecting companies from liability, but nothing has passed yet.

4. NLRB Charges and Union Organizing

There are a number of signs that union organizing will increase as a result of COVID-19. Here are exhibits one, two, and three. Even nonprofit workers are turning to union organizing.

Union organizing and NLRB charges will continue to increase in the wake of COVID-19. Many unions have used the pandemic to strengthen their relationship with employees and seek to organize more employees. Many have been successful because employers have failed to take appropriate steps to protect employees or have not communicated with  employees about the steps that they have taken.

As a reminder, in some prior posts I wrote about what employers can and cannot do in a union organizing campaign and how to respond to an NLRB charge.

a. Employee Walkout Issues

There will continue to be employee walkouts because of the coronavirus. Stories about employees walking out because of concerns about safety are everywhere. As COVID-19 continues to cause problems and potentially a second wave of the Coronavirus comes, employers may see more walkout issues. This may especially be the case for workers that are more concerned about the virus because they are more susceptible to suffering from a severe reaction from it. Employers should remember that walkouts are likely protected under both the OSH Act (which may protect workers that refuse to perform a job if they are in imminent danger) and the National Labor Relations Act (which protects concerted protected activities by employees).

5. Employee Recall Lawsuits

As businesses reopen, there are a number of issues where employers could get into trouble. I wrote about employee recall issues recently. Specifically, I listed issues regarding the WARN Act, age discrimination, collective bargaining issues, and issues with the FFCRA once an employee is brought back. As businesses recall employees all of these issues, especially those related to discrimination, will become major concerns.

6. Refusal to Perform An Illegal Act

A Texas Supreme Court case called Sabine Pilot Service, Inc. v. Hauck states that an employer cannot fire an employee when they refuse to perform an illegal act.

In a recently filed case, an employee was required to come into the office to work. She claims that she was able to work from home and that the business was not an essential business and thus her employer was requiring to do an illegal act by requiring her to come to work. She claims that she was fired for refusing to come to work, which would have violated the stay at home order.

As businesses continue to reopen and restrictions continue to be placed on businesses, it may be the case that there will be additional lawsuits like this one.

7. FFCRA and Expanded Family and Medical Leave Lawsuits

When employees are finally able to resume working and meet with attorneys, it is likely that some of them will have potential claims against their employer for failing to follow the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). There may have been a number of people that have not been able to work because of childcare issues, their own illnesses, and being denied leave for other reasons (some of which may be legitimate). At least one employer has already been sued. Many companies will face similar lawsuits.  

8. Disability Discrimination Lawsuits

As I mentioned previously, employers have obligations to accommodate individuals based on a disability. As companies open up, it is likely that many people that may be more vulnerable to COVID-19 will seek accommodations from their employer. The most common accommodations include remote work or additional leave. The way that employers respond to these employee requests for a reasonable accomodation will be critical to avoiding potential lawsuits.

9. Employee Layoff Issues and Lawsuits

The sheer number of employees that have lost their jobs (more than 40 million) leaves a lot of room for lawsuits that typically follow a layoff. Excluding lawsuits related to WARN, here are some of the common issues that follow a layoff.

a. COBRA Notice Lawsuits

I wrote about COBRA notice problems in a recent post. There will be more COBRA lawsuits due to the difficulty that many companies have in providing appropriate notice to employees of their loss in health insurance coverage.

b. Non-Compete and Trade Secret Litigation

As people leave companies because of layoffs many will try to start their own companies or will be hired by competitors of their former employer. Some of these employees will inadvertently or purposefully try to take clients or trade secrets of their former employer. Companies should be careful when laying off workers that they eliminate employee access to various accounts and that no information is taken. Companies would do well to consider a severance agreement for employees with any confidential information to make sure that they return all confidential information and understand their responsibilities.

c. Failure to Pay Employees Properly

At least one company has been sued for failing to pay employees after the business was forced to shutdown due to COVID-19 and the employer lacked the funds to pay employees for their most recent work. It is likely that a number of wage and hour lawsuits will occur after the pandemic ends. Many employees were working remotely at time when many companies did not have many remote employees and may not have had the framework in place to track working time for these employees. The failure to correctly track time worked is likely to be a big concern for all companies that had hourly employees that were working remotely.

10. Remote Work Increases

Remote work is going to increase after the pandemic ends. Approximately 66% of workers were working remotely at the height of the coronavirus. This is compared to the approximately 5 million workers (or 3.6% of the workforce) that were working at home at least half the time in 2018. One survey from Gartner of CFO’s found that 74% of the surveyed CFO’s believed that 5% of their workforce would be permanently converted from office to remote employees after the pandemic ends. With as easy as it is to work from anywhere for office employees one should expect this trend to continue to accelerate.

Conclusion

Life after the pandemic will be very different than it was before. People are much more concerned about safety.  Travel is down and will stay that way for the foreseeable future. Some countries are discussing reducing globalization and diversifying their supply chains. In other words, the pandemic and the governments’ reaction to it are a major black swan event.

Companies need to be aware of the above issues in the immediate future as they navigate a post COVID-19 pandemic workplace. The only way for companies to grow after COVID-19 is for companies to adapt and seek ways to improve. Companies need to plan for the above problems and work with employees to succeed. With a recession already underway and uncertainty about how long it will take the economy to recover, planning is critical to the future success of companies.

The information provided in this blog is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, then you should speak with a lawyer about your specific issues. Every legal issue is unique. A lawyer can help you with your situation. Reading the blog, contacting me through the site, emailing me or commenting on a post does not create an attorney-client relationship between any reader and me.

The information provided is my own and does not reflect the opinion of my firm or anyone else.                                                                                                                                                                                   

2020 Labor & Employment Law Predictions

Image of a man holding a "Happy New Year" sign to kick off the 2020 labor and employment law predictions for the Texas Labor Law Blog
Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

2020 has arrived and so have my 2020 labor and employment law predictions. One side note, I am not going to repeat my 2019 labor and employment law predictions that are likely to happen in 2020 (new states that protect medical marijuana use outside of work, increased sexual harassment charges, the elimination of the H-4 EAD program, the NLRB issuing the joint employer standard, more states passing paid family leave, independent contractor issues arising, notices of inspection (I-9 inspections) increasing, and the Supreme Court’s decision on DACA.) So what’s new in 2020? Let’s dive right in.

1. Minimum Wage Increases Will Occur in a Number of States and Ballot Initiatives Will Be Undertaken to Get Them on the Ballot in Additional States

Florida is one state that will have a ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage to $15 per hour. The bill would raise the wage to $10 by September 30, 2021 and then increase it by one dollar every year until the wage reaches $15 in 2026. It is likely to pass as 25 out of the 27 ballot initiatives to increase the minimum wage were approved from 1988 to 2018

Arizona (Arizona Hospital Worker Minimum Wage and Insurance Regulations Initiative), Idaho (Idaho Minimum Wage Increase Initiative), and Missouri (Missouri Prohibit State Preemption of Local Minimum Wage and Benefits Laws Initiative) also have potential ballot measures related to the minimum wage next year. Each of them are in the gathering signatures stage and more states could potentially follow suit. Arizona’s law is for hospital workers, Idaho’s law would raise the minimum wage to $12 by 2024, and Missouri’s would prohibit the state from stopping local governments from enacting their own minimum wages.

2. Retail Closures and Other Layoffs (Perhaps in the Energy Sector) Continue to Remain High or Accelerate

Ok. So, this is not exactly a labor and employment law prediction, but it affects employment law. Over 9,000 stores closed in 2019 (more retail stores closed than opened). Even if the number of retail closures is not as high next year, there is still the probability that there will be a number of closures

In the world of oil and gas, there are a lot of companies with debt maturities coming due in 2020 or 2021 (see this article from the Wall Street Journal discussing the $120 billion debt wall these companies will face through 2023), and oil prices have been below the break-even point for many drilling sites. It is possible that there could be a number of layoffs in that industry. Of course, the situation in Iran (the death of Soleimani and Iran’s reaction to his death), any decisions from OPEC, and any possible economic slowdowns or other geopolitical issues could change this.

Unemployment is still low and there are more job openings than there are people that can fill them. If a recession takes place, then everything will change.

The workplace and workforce is changing even if the situation for retail stores and the oil and gas industry improves and we avoid a recession. Many people have read articles about the jobs that supposedly won’t exist in the future, which is something to keep an eye on. In short, layoffs are a part of life and the economy. We can expect them to continue or increase in 2020.

3. Onboarding and Employee Retention Continues to Grow in Importance

No matter what happens next year with layoffs, there will be a lot of workers that will need to be trained, retrained and onboarded. Companies are finally starting to recognize they need to find, adequately train, and keep their employees because unemployment is at a low. In short, businesses are going to want to find the right people, train them well, and try to keep them given the lack of qualified and available employees. Remember, onboarding is more than just orientation. It is a long process to help workers become established in an organization and usually occurs over an extended period of time through a set process to help the employees adjust to their new job. Onboarding also takes more importance as certain jobs are eliminated, new technology is brought into a company, and workers change positions. 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics found that “Over the 12 months ending in October, hires totaled 69.8 million and separations totaled 67.4 million, yielding a net employment gain of 2.4 million. These totals include workers who may have been hired and separated more than once during the year.” Again, there were 69.8 million people hired between October 2018 and October 2019. Onboarding, training, and employee retention have gained in importance over the past few years and will continue to do so.

4. The Governmental Agencies Gear Up for the Election by Releasing a Lot of New Regulations Before the Election Happens

The Congressional Review Act allows a new Congress to disapprove of any new regulation within a 60 legislative day window by a majority vote. If the vote succeeds, then the rule does not go into effect. It was only used once before the Trump administration. The Republican Congress under Trump used it 14 times.

The Trump administration and the agencies will push out new regulations and decisions to avoid their regulations being undone either by the Congressional Review Act or by the heads of the agencies after the election (assuming that a Democrat is elected). Many agencies that previously did not engage in much rulemaking are also engaging in rulemaking to avoid their new rules being overturned easily (through decisions). You can look to the NLRB (joint employer rule) and the DOL (overtime rule and joint employer rule) as prime examples of this.

5. Candidates Push Their Election Agendas Which Will Give us a Peek into the Labor and Employment Landscape in 2021

I wrote awhile back about the Democratic candidates. At that time there were around 25 different candidates. Most of those have basically fallen away. We can expect that President Trump and the eventual Democratic candidate will propose a number of different ideas that will affect the workplace.

I expect President Trump to push limiting immigration based on the belief that this will protect American jobs and perhaps he will also propose some kind of paid family leave program as he discussed in his 2016 campaign.

The Democratic candidate can be expected to support raising the minimum wage to $15, the PRO act (that would transform union organizing, eliminate right to work states, permit card check (union elections would not need to happen if enough authorization cards were signed), expand the definition of ‘joint employer’, permit secondary boycotts (targeting neutral worksites), adopt a more restrictive definition of independent contractors, and much more), and a paid family leave program. Depending on the final Democratic candidate, more proposals could go into effect. Moreover, the success of these proposals will depend on the final composition of the House and Senate (in addition to who controls the White House).

6. Union Elections and Organizing Increases this Year Especially in the Tech Sector

Unfortunately, I did not get to publish this blog post before this prediction started to come true (I swear I wrote this before I heard about the CWU trying to organize video game developers, you can ask my kids, but who can trust anyone under 5 years old…). The tech sector is going to become an increasing target of union organizing. Unfortunately, many companies do not treat their employees right (they work long hours, their concerns are not addressed, and many of their coworkers are let go for what feels like no reason to them). Mistreated employees are always the biggest threat and cause of union organizing. The tech sector is ripe for organizing because many companies fit this model.

7. More States Pass Employment Related Laws- Especially Variations of the Independent Contractor Law that California Adopted (the ABC Test)

Employment law has become more fragmented and more influenced by multiple sectors of government (federal, state, county, and city) with a greater influence at the local level than ever before. This is going to continue. This fragmentation affects almost every area of employment law (labor law has not been affected to the same degree). For example, a number of states have their own overtime salary threshold so the new federal overtime rule does not affect them and a number of states have begun to tighten their independent contractor rules (which means that companies must follow these complex rules for each state that they operate in).

This one is not so much a prediction as it is a statement of fact. With the current administration being more business friendly (and depending on the results of the election in 2020, that may continue for 4 more years) the trend of employment law is increasingly being done at the state and local level.

8. Mental Health Issues and the Workplace Become More Important

Nearly 1 in 5 adults had a mental illness in 2016.  Carley Sime at Forbes wrote “Mental health and substance abuse cost US businesses between $80 and $100 billion annually.” That is a cost that companies cannot ignore. In 2020 and throughout the decade more companies will recognize this cost and offer treatment and solutions to their staff.

The good news is that more companies are discovering that treatment works. The Center for Workplace Mental Health found that 80 percent of employees treated for mental health problems reported improvements in both their productivity and job satisfaction. 

More companies are recognizing the effects of mental health and wellbeing on their workforce and taking steps to prioritize these issues and ensure their employees feel supported.

9. There will be a Ton of Issues Around Free Speech and the Workplace (i.e. It is an Election Year).

This one feels like cheating. It hardly counts as a prediction. It is an election year.

Trump is a polarizing figure. Politics seems more divided now than any time in the last twenty years or so. “A 53-point [difference] separates the percentage of Republicans (65%) and the percentage of Democrats (13%) who believe the United States is headed in the right direction, according to data from the latest Economist/YouGov poll.”

We may be more divided now than any time since Thomas Jefferson and John Adams faced off (you really need to watch this video on what they said about each other in the campaign to understand how bad it was) With this being an election year, we also get to experience attack ads (here is a history of attack ads), which means that more people will have more fodder to attack supporters of one candidate.

Additionally, from a workplace perspective, the election will likely cause more people to talk about politics at work, which can be another polarizing situation you may want to be smart about. You can read about what to do here. This is something that will probably only get more divisive before it improves (some time after the 2020 presidential election but before the 2022 midterms). With the impeachment and the bitterness of this election we have reached a bit of a tipping point in divisive politics and can perhaps expect them to be more divisive and interfere with the workplace more than ever. 

10. The Cases Before the Supreme Court Put Increased Focus on Religion, Transgender Issues, and Sexual Orientation in the Workplace.

With a Supreme Court decision on whether sexual orientation is a protected characteristic and whether transgenderism is protected (see this previous article discussing Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda (sexual orientation discrimination cases)) and (R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (gender identity/transgenderism discrimination case)) this is an issue that will see more traction this year. Once these decisions come out there will be talk in many workplaces about sexual orientation, transgender issues, and religion in the workplace.

The Supreme Court cases on the ministerial exception add to this issue. Here is a breakdown from SCOTUSblog on those cases:

In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru and St. James School v. Biel, the justices will consider the scope of the “ministerial exception,” a court-created doctrine that prohibits courts from reviewing employment decisions by religious employers involving their ministers. Under the exception, courts must determine which employees serve a “ministerial function.” In these cases, which will be argued together, two California Catholic schools are challenging rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit that teachers who sued the schools after the teachers’ contracts were not renewed were not, despite their religious duties, “ministers” for purposes of the exception. The schools tell the justices that the issues presented in the two cases are “vital to the daily operations of religious organizations,” and that “getting it right is crucial in protecting church-state relations.”

All of these Supreme Court decisions will cause a lot of talk about the place of religious beliefs and how they relate to the issue of sexual orientation and transgenderism/gender identity.

11. States Continue to Implement Restrictions on Noncompetition Agreements

This is something that is already happening in a number of states and now the FTC has also begun to weigh in on the issue.  The Federal Trade Commission recently held a public workshop to “examine whether there is a sufficient legal basis and empirical economic support to promulgate a Commission Rule that would restrict the use of non-compete clauses in employer-employee employment contracts. This follows a labor market workshop hosted by the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division in September 2019.”

Washington has a law that went into effect on January 1 that prohibits noncompetes for employees that earn less than $100,000 and independent contractors that earn less than or equal to $250,000.

Maryland also enacted a similar law last year that prohibits noncompetes for “employees earning equal to or less than $31,200 annually or $15 per hour.”

Maine’s law went into effect in 2019 and prohibits employers from entering into a noncompete agreement with an employee if they earn wages at or below 400% of the federal poverty level.

New Hampshire passed a law in 2019 that prohibits employers from entering into or enforcing agreements with low-wage employees (those earning less than 200% of the federal minimum wage currently $14.50 an hour).

Rhode Island’s law went into effect on January 15. It prohibits noncompetes for nonexempt employees, certain graduate and undergraduate students, people 18 and under, and low wage employees (those earning less than 250% of the federal poverty level currently $600.48 per week ($31,225 / 52))

Conclusion

2020 is going to be a big year for employment and labor law issues. Employers should prepare for these upcoming changes to ensure that they are staying a step ahead of the competition. As usual, these issues will be followed this year at the Texas Labor Law Blog, and I hope you all stay ahead of the curve this year!        

The information provided in this blog is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, then you should speak with a lawyer about your specific issues. Every legal issue is unique. A lawyer can help you with your situation. Reading the blog, contacting me through the site, emailing me or commenting on a post does not create an attorney-client relationship between any reader and me.

The information provided is my own and does not reflect the opinion of my firm or anyone else.                                                                                                                                                                                    

How to Respond to Union Organizing

Image of a light bulb to show that employers need to have ideas and a plan to respond to union organizing.
Photo by Diego PH on Unsplash

Some employers are caught off guard when they learn that their employees want a union. Many do not know what to do and, as we all know, being ignorant of the law does not mean that you cannot get in trouble. Many employers find themselves in legal hot water because they were not prepared and did not know what they could and could not do in a union organizing drive. Thankfully, there is no reason that you have to be one of those people.

The great news is that there are steps employers can take today to ensure that they are prepared to respond if their employees seek to unionize. By taking some action before a union organizing drive occurs, employers can prevent trouble that may occur later.

What Can Employers do Before Union Organizing Starts or Before They Are Even Aware a Union is Seeking to Organize?

There are some basic policies that every employer should have and follow at their workplace. By being prepared and preemptively ensuring you have these policies, an employer is better prepared in the event of a union organizing campaign. Once an employer becomes aware that a union is organizing at  a company, it may become harder to make changes because the employees could allege that you have violated the National Labor Relations Act through some of your actions.

All employers should consider having the following policies and practices before any union organizing occurs:

  • Have a no solicitation policy that prohibits employees from soliciting other employees during working time and in working areas. This means that employees cannot ask employees to buy girl scout cookies, sign union authorization cards, or buy into the latest multi-level marketing (MLM) scheme (some people call these pyramid schemes) while they are working, but are free to do so on their breaks or at lunch.
  • Solicit employee complaints and grievances regularly. Every employer should seek feedback from employees on a regular basis through quarterly town halls and other meetings where employees are asked for feedback in groups.

These simple steps won’t guarantee that a workplace will not become unionized, but they do make a big difference in how employers run their workplaces and cut down on lost productivity.

What Can Union Organizers Do During a Union Organizing Campaign?

One of the most common strategies that unions use when they try to unionize a workplace is to assign a union organizer to a company. This person may either seek to be hired by the company for a position (sometimes called a “salt”) or they may conduct organizing as a non-employee. Many companies have a visceral reaction when  a union organizer appears at a company. Companies that do not know what to do will often commit actions that result in unfair labor practices against the company.

One of the most frequent issues is that the employer will seek to exclude the union from public property and will sometimes even call the police to have union organizers removed from areas that they are entitled to be in.  Union organizers cannot enter company property to pass out flyers (if they are not employees). However, they can pass out flyers at areas that you do not own. Many organizers will stand in the street or public sidewalk to pass out flyers as workers leave, which is permissible.

So, what can a union organizer do?

  • They can act as “salts.” Meaning they can be hired by your business with the intention of organizing the facility. If any organizer is also an employee, then they have the rights of employees below (passing out flyers in the parking lot or cafeteria, etc.).
  • Organizers can contact employees at their homes or elsewhere even if the employee does not want to be bothered and has asked them to leave.
  • They can ask employees to sign union authorization cards and hand out flyers at public areas near the company property.
  • Organizers can create a Facebook or other social media page with pictures of employees and invite employees to attend various events.

What Can Employees Do During a Union Organizing Campaign?

Employees have a lot more rights than union organizers and nonunion employees when it comes to organizing in the workplace. In a union organizing campaign employees can:

  • Talk about the union during their breaks and pass out authorization cards on non-working time (assuming the employer does have a no solicitation policy). If the employer does not have a no solicitation policy, then employers can pass out this literature and talk about the union throughout their working day.
  • Organize meetings in their homes and elsewhere to discuss having a union.
  • Pass out flyers and talk about the union at work while they are on a break. Employers may have rules regarding solicitation in working times and working areas, but these rules must be in place and enforced for them to be effective in a union campaign. If employers have no policies, then employees can solicit while they are working.
  • Wear buttons, t-shirts, and other insignia (unless this must be prevented for business necessity reasons in certain areas such as in the production area of a food processing facility because no one wants to bite into a hard metal union pin while they are eating).

Employees that do not support a union can create their own hand outs, T-shirts, and even demonstrate against having a union at the facility. They have the ability to do everything that the employees that support the union can do, but in reverse.

Responding to a Union Organizing Campaign

There are a number of things that a company can do when it is faced with a union organizing campaign. First, companies can continue to do what they have already been planning to do or had already done in the past when a union campaign begins (such as giving planned pay raises).

Some of the things that employers can do when a union campaign occurs are:

  • Correct any untrue statements or misstatements from the union. For example, employers can tell employees that a union cannot guarantee that wages will go up.
  • Employers/Supervisors can discuss their own experience with unions.
  • Employers can tell employees that the company is opposed to union representation.
  • Compare the pay and benefits of employees of the company to union facilities.
  • Tell employees that if they join a union, then they will be required to pay union dues, initiation fees, and that they can be fined for violating union rules.

What Employers Cannot Do in A Union Organizing Campaign

All supervisors, HR, and other members of management must be trained on what they cannot do during a union organizing campaign. These are one of the most frequent sources of charges in an organizing campaign. Employers cannot engage in TIPS:

  • Threaten
  • Interrogate
  • Promise
  • Spy

As I said in my earlier post on Responding to an NLRB Charge:

Employers cannot threaten employees with any adverse action (discipline, termination, reducing pay) because they support a union or engage in protected activity. Companies cannot interrogate employees on whether they support a union. Employers cannot promise employees benefits or better pay to encourage employees to stop supporting a union. Finally, employers cannot spy on employees that are engaging in union or protected activity (like having a meeting offsite about whether employees should join a union).

Conclusion

There is a lot that employers can do during a union campaign, but there is also a lot that can cause the employer to have an unfair labor practice filed against them. It is important that employers be prepared and preemptive to ensure they are not breaking rules that will result in a charge against them. Every illegal action by members of management (even low-level supervisors) can cause an unfair labor practice. Employers have to be prepared for union organizing because elections take place very quickly after employees sign enough union authorization cards. The average election occurs within 23 days of a petition being filed (these can be filed when 30% of employees sign union authorization cards).

The information provided in this blog is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. If you need legal advice, then you should speak with a lawyer about your specific issues. Every legal issue is unique. A lawyer can help you with your situation. Reading the blog, contacting me through the site, emailing me or commenting on a post does not create an attorney-client relationship between any reader and me.

The information provided is my own and does not reflect the opinion of my firm or anyone else.

Brett Holubeck (of Houston, Texas) is the attorney responsible for this site.