Author: James J. La Rocca
As previously discussed on the Employment Law Alert, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or the “NLRB”) recently implemented a rule that could speed up the union election process and, in turn, leave employers with less time to communicate their positions on unions to employees. Yesterday, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia declared the rule invalid because only two Board members were “present” when the NLRB passed the rule last December. The court explained that the Board did not satisfy the National Labor Relations Act’s requirement that the NLRB have a quorum (typically the presence of three Board members) to conduct business when it voted on the rule. “According to Woody Allen, eight percent of life is just showing up,” wrote the court. “When it comes to satisfying a quorum requirement, though, showing up is even more important than that.”
On December 22, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or the “NLRB”) issued another “union-friendly” rule that could speed up the union election process, leaving employers with limited time to respond to a union organizing drive. A pending lawsuit challenging the legality of the new rule is outstanding. Notwithstanding, the rule applies to all newly-filed election petitions effective today as the court has not postponed the rule’s effective date despite the ongoing litigation. The court will rule on the legitimacy of the rule by May 15 (before an election could take place under the new rule).
Last week, the New Jersey Supreme Court reiterated that lawyers who represent clients on a contingency basis in disputes brought under New Jersey laws that permit the recovery of attorneys’ fees can recover an additional fee “enhancement” pursuant to the framework the Court set forth nearly 20 years ago in Rendine v. Pantzer, 141 N.J. 292 (1995) . The decision, Walker v. Guiffre, Case Nos. 72-10, 100-10 (N.J. Jan. 25, 2012), is noteworthy for businesses that all too frequently must weigh the risk of paying their opponents’ attorneys’ fees when deciding whether to settle disputes – particularly those companies that wishfully thought the reins on contingency fee enhancers might be tightened in light of two recent decisions by New Jersey appellate courts.
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (“CFAA”) is a federal law that, in part, makes it a crime to access a computer in an unauthorized manner. In the employment context, the statute has proven valuable in protecting confidential and proprietary information that employees can access on their employers’ electronic systems. Recent decisions by the United States Courts of Appeals for the Ninth and Third Circuits emphasize the breadth of the CFAA’s application to the workplace.
We previously reported that the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or “NLRB”) issued a final rule requiring most private-sector employers to post a notice of employee rights to unionize in their workplaces. In a follow-up report, we explained that the Board delayed the posting’s effective date from November 14, 2011 until January 31, 2012 in the wake of lawsuits filed by business and industry organizations (including the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business challenging the NLRB’s authority to issue such a rule. The Board recently announced that it once again is postponing the effective date of the posting — this time until April 30, 2012 — in order to “facilitate the resolution of the legal challenges that have been filed with respect to the rule.” We continue to encourage employers to take advantage of this additional time to assess the potential impact that the required posting may have on their workplaces, and the manner in which they may want to communicate with employees regarding their positions on unions (if any). Attorneys in Gibbons Employment and Labor Law Department have extensive experience counseling both union and non-union employers regarding labor relations issues. If you have any questions regarding the impact that this rule may have on your business, please feel free to contact any of the attorneys in the Department.
As previously reported in the Employment Law Alert, the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or “NLRB”) recently issued a final rule requiring most private-sector employers to post a notice of employee rights to unionize in their workplaces. On October 5, 2011, the Board announced that it is delaying the posting’s effective date from November 14, 2011 until January 31, 2012 “in order to allow for enhanced education and outreach to employers, particularly those who operate small and medium sized businesses.”
The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board” or “NLRB”) recently issued a final rule requiring most private-sector employers to post a notice of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act” or “NLRA”) in their workplaces. (Chapter 1 of the Board’s An Outline of Law and Procedure in Representation Cases details which employers fall within the Act’s jurisdiction.) Business and industry associations, including the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the National Federation of Independent Business have filed suits challenging the Board’s authority to issue such a rule. Absent a decision by the courts that, in the words of NLRB Member Brian Hayes — who issued a dissent to the rule (starting at page 54037) — would “rescue the Board from itself and restore the law to where it was before the sorcerer’s apprentice sent it askew,” employers must post the notice by November 14, 2011.
