hrdailyreport.com » 2011 » 09 » What? NLRB overrules employee vote to boot union

What? NLRB overrules employee vote to boot union

September 28, 2011 by James Russo
Posted in: Employment law, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News and Views, Management, Unions

How is it possible that the majority of a company’s employees can vote against union representation but the company still has to accept the union? The answer lies in a few statements made by an angry manager.

A recent case before the National Labor Relations Board illustrates that managers have to be especially careful about what they say when a union steps in to negotiate for workers.

In the NLRB decision — Mesker Door, Inc., 357 NLRB, No. 59 — a union was certified as the collective bargaining representative at an Alabama company. Employer and union representatives met over the course of a year without coming to an agreement on a contract.

A frustrated manager then gave a speech in which he:

  • threatened to fire two employees for filing unfair-labor-practice complaints
  • stated that the company had been required to pay lawyers over $200,000 to defend against the charges, when the money “otherwise could have gone into improving life in the plant,” and
  • suggested that if the union had been more cooperative, the employees would have received larger monthly bonus checks.

After that speech, a majority of the company’s employees voted to kick out the union. So far, so good for the employer until …

The NLRB ruled the plant manager’s speech contained unlawful statements, including

  • an implied threat of discharge against the two employees who had filed the complaints, and
  • the suggestion that attorneys’ fees – and union stubbornness – resulted in lower employee bonus payments.

The result: The board found that the employer could not lawfully withdraw recognition of the union based on the employees’ vote, because the manager’s statement “tainted” the vote.

 

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply


advertisement

Research



advertisement

See what readers are saying...

  • Charles Barragan: Perhaps I'm naive but would someone explain what bearing an applicant's prior salary has on the job being applied for? ...
  • AB: Perhaps a question recruiters should ask themselves is: If asked, would I "friend" or give someone my Facebook account p...
  • Sarah Charton: If you persuade a candidate to grant you access to his/her Facebook account, there is no "fine tooth comb". You see it ...
  • E. Dennison: Apparently you failed to read the GINA exceptions: b) Acquisition of Genetic Information.--It shall be an unlawful empl...
  • DK: Huh? How are we supposed to use the form if we can't gather Medical Facts or Amount of Leave Needed?...
  • Ranessa: An intelligent answer - no BS - which makes a plaesnat change...







a