Search for: "National Labor Relations Board" Results 201 - 220 of 8,167
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 May 2011, 3:17 pm by Laura Robertson
On May 19, 2011, we predicted that we had not yet heard the last word from the National Labor Relations Board on the intersection of social media and employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act … and we were right. [read post]
28 Sep 2020, 12:11 pm by Robert T. Dumbacher and Reilly C. Moore
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause uncertainty for employers across the country, but, as the National Labor Relations Board reiterated on September 18, it does not excuse labor law violations. [read post]
4 Mar 2020, 1:55 pm by Race to the Bottom
(“Barstool”) reached an informal settlement with the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) that calls for the deletion of tweets and removal of other anti-union material created by the company. [read post]
18 Feb 2020, 9:01 pm by Samuel Estreicher and Christopher Owens
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) is often criticized on two fronts. [read post]
25 Aug 2016, 11:31 am by lennyesq
By Peter Jones on August 24, 2016 The National Labor Relations Board, in Columbia University, issued a 3-1 decision yesterday holding that graduate, and undergraduate, student assistants are common law employees within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act and therefore are eligible to organize and bargain collectively under federal labor law. [read post]
Today, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) followed through on its earlier promise and issued its Joint Employer Final Rule, officially reversing the Board’s 2015 Browning-Ferris Industries (BFI) decision[1] and conclusively establishing the legal ground rules under which otherwise separate business entities may be legally joined and determined to be joint employers for the purposes of the National Labor… [read post]
In a memorandum released in 2012, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) explained its position on various social media policies after having reviewed the policies of seven employers, finding six of them to contain unlawful provisions. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 10:00 pm
The November 2010 Labor and Employment Law Update focuses on the ADAAA, affirmative action plans, antitrust lawsuits, group health insurance and the PPACA, National Labor Relations Board, social networking, wage and hour claims, and wellness programs. [read post]
17 Nov 2010, 10:00 pm
The November 2010 Labor and Employment Law Update focuses on the ADAAA, affirmative action plans, antitrust lawsuits, group health insurance and the PPACA, National Labor Relations Board, social networking, wage and hour claims, and wellness programs. [read post]
In its 84-year history, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB, Board or Agency) has promulgated a very small number of rules pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, relying, instead, on individualized adjudications to establish the Board’s legislative policies. [read post]
16 Mar 2007, 5:26 am
Here's the abstract: In 2004 the National Labor Relations Board, over a powerful dissent, overruled its own 1976 precedent and effectively rewrote the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 to apply to Indian tribal government employment [read post]
On Tuesday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) issued its much-awaited decision in General Motors, LLC (GM), 369 NLRB No. 127 (2020), in which it held that abusive or inappropriate workplace speech by employees engaged in protected concerted or union activity (PCA) is not protected under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or Act) and that employers may discipline workers for engaging in such conduct,… [read post]
8 Apr 2022, 3:30 am by Eric B. Meyer
On Wednesday, the National Labor Relations Board announced here that during the first six months of FY2022 (October 1–March 31), union representation petitions filed at the NLRB had increased 57%—up to 1,174 from 748 during the first half of FY2021. [read post]
30 Sep 2009, 4:55 am
[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] on Tuesday asked [press release] the Supreme Court [official website] to rule that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) [official website] is authorized to issue decisions regarding the Nation Labor Relations Act (NLRA) [text] when three out of five board seats are vacant. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]
22 Feb 2023, 10:00 pm
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a decision on February 21 in McLaren Macomb (372 NLRB No. 58) overruling precedent to hold that employers may not offer employees severance agreements containing confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions. [read post]