Given the variety and complexity of tasks associated with operations management, automated systems, including those utilizing artificial intelligence (AI), are increasingly deployed by businesses to improve overall efficiencies. As part of this effort, the use of AI or related automated systems to track and monitor production, including employee activities, is becoming widespread. A 2022 New York Times survey revealed that eight out of the 10 largest private U.S. employers track individual workers, many in real time, to assess their productivity. Any process that utilizes electronic devices capable of being connected via network technology suddenly becomes a trove of data points that can be used to monitor or improve the process—or the employees engaged in the process.

On June 11, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) affirmed that a union violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by refusing to honor employees’ dues revocation requests following a successful deauthorization election. This rare but significant case, Governed United Security Professionals (Golden SVCS, LLC) and Sheldon N. Fraser, sheds light on the

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration plans to propose a new rule requiring employers to protect employees exposed to high temperatures at work. This federal government regulation is the first of its kind to provide protection from heat on the job. As the summer months arrive and heat records rise, employers would do well to examine OSHA’s proposal, and to understand the legal pitfalls facing employers under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Labor Management Relations Act (LMRA), should employees complain about or walk off the job due to excessive heat in the workplace.

Employers in the United States received a significant win on March 8, 2024, when a federal court in Texas struck down the National Labor Relations Board’s (“Board”) expansive new “joint employer” rule, and upheld the existing (and more employer-friendly) 2020 rule. This rule would have expanded the circumstances under which two businesses could be designated as “joint employers,” and that could have significantly altered the legal landscape attendant to various workplace relationships.

Historically, the banking and finance industry has operated without much union interference. However, under the current guidance of Jennifer Abruzzo, General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”), the tides are turning toward unionization in sectors previously not considered ripe for union organizing, including banking and finance.

On May 1, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued its decision in Lion Elastomers and United Steelworkers, making it more difficult for employers to discipline employees for outbursts and similar misconduct while employees are engaged in protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”).

It is not often that the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) gives employers a heads-up before it makes broad, and often burdensome, changes, but a recently issued ALJ decision might be the exception to the rule. Earlier this year, an Administrative Law Judge issued a decision in Saint Leo University, Inc., 12-CA-275612 (2023) reinforcing how the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”) is applied to religious educational institutions, however, the briefing in the case indicated how that application might change in the near future.

According to a recent Gallup poll, 71 percent of Americans “approve of labor unions,” up three percentage points from 2021.

This represents a generational high-water mark for union support – the last time Gallup measured a higher union approval rating among the American public was 1959 when 73 Americans approved of labor unions. Prior to this year, union support had remained lower than 70% ever since union support dropped to 66 percent in 1967. The low-water mark was reached in 2009 when unions enjoyed only 48% support from the American public.

On August 29, 2022, the NLRB issued its decision in Tesla, Inc., overruling precedent that allowed employers to enforce facially-neutral dress codes to prohibit wearing non-conforming attire, including union insignia and union logos. Now, employers must allow employees to wear union attire absent a showing of “special circumstances.”

The Labor Law Insider continues the discussion in this podcast episode with Tom Godar, Tom O’Day, Terry Potter and Rufino Gaytán on actions employers should take proactively to deter unions from garnering employee support in the workplace. Shifting social issues in and outside the workplace along with significant public support for labor unions subject all