On June 11, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a very short but interesting decision in Governed United Security Professionals (Golden SVCS, LLC) and Sheldon N. Fraser, 373 NLRB No. 66 (June 11, 2024), affirming an administrative law judge’s (ALJ) finding that a union violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when it refused to recognize employees’ dues revocation requests after a successful deauthorization election. Deauthorization elections are rare, and this decision is a ripe opportunity to review the specific facts of this case and remind employers about this arcane but significant procedural NLRA vehicle.

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.

In this episode of the Labor Law Insider, attorneys Adam DoerrTrecia Moore, and host Tom Godar continue their discussion of decertification petitions, focusing on some of the practical implications related to decertification efforts, including:

  • Employees who are frustrated with their union representative may be stymied by the complex decertification process, and the

In this episode of the Labor Law Insider podcast, our host, Tom Godar, is joined by Husch Blackwell attorneys Adam Doerr and Trecia Moore to discuss union decertification. 

  • In 2022 there were approximately 1,700 petitions for election filed before the NLRB, and about 300 of these were filed by employees to decertify their bargaining

Under a typical election scenario, a union files an election petition with the Board’s Regional Office, along with a “showing of interest” demonstrating enough employee support (at least 30% of the unit described in the petition) to justify an election. The union also serves the petition on the employer, along with a description of Board procedures, informing parties of their rights and obligations in the process, and a “statement of position” form.

On August 2, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) issued its anticipated ruling in Stericycle, Inc., reversing the Trump-era Boeing decision that famously implemented a three-category test for balancing whether workplace rules unlawfully interfered with employees’ rights to engage in “protected concerted activity” under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA” or the “Act”).

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”).