Search for: "MCLAREN MACOMB"
Results 1 - 20
of 85
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2024, 8:47 am
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in an appeal brought by Michigan hospital McLaren Macomb. [read post]
2 Apr 2024, 8:48 am
This case notwithstanding, I stand by my strong criticism of McLaren Macomb. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 2:10 am
Earlier this year, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued its decision and order in McLaren Macomb, in which it concluded certain confidentiality and nondisparagement provisions in employee severance agreements violated the employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)—and the mere offer of such provisions in severance agreements is unlawful. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 6:58 am
In line with the Board’s prior ruling in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (2023), the complaint also alleges that the company committed several unfair labor practices because it allegedly instructed its employees that they could not discuss their individual employment contracts and handbooks with other employees, and fired employees for violating a non-disparagement clause included in the company’s handbook. [read post]
2 Oct 2023, 1:01 pm
Earlier this year, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued its decision and order in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (February 21, 2023), in which it concluded that certain confidentiality and nondisparagement provisions in employee severance agreements violated the employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) – and the mere offer of such provisions in severance agreements is unlawful. [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 11:43 am
(For more information on the McLaren Macomb decision and its impact, see Non-Disclosure and Non-Disparagement Provisions Under Scrutiny). [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 11:43 am
(For more information on the McLaren Macomb decision and its impact, see Non-Disclosure and Non-Disparagement Provisions Under Scrutiny). [read post]
18 Aug 2023, 11:43 am
(For more information on the McLaren Macomb decision and its impact, see Non-Disclosure and Non-Disparagement Provisions Under Scrutiny). [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 5:54 pm
NLRB [this dates from February 2023]: “The Board issued a decision in McLaren Macomb, returning to longstanding precedent holding that employers may not offer employees severance agreements that require employees to broadly waive their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. [read post]
7 Aug 2023, 5:54 pm
NLRB [this dates from February 2023]: “The Board issued a decision in McLaren Macomb, returning to longstanding precedent holding that employers may not offer employees severance agreements that require employees to broadly waive their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. [read post]
5 Jul 2023, 7:02 am
In a recent holding by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on the case of McLaren Macomb and Local 40 RN Staff Council, Office and Professional Employees, International Union (OPEIU), AFL-CI0, Case 07-CA-263041, there were significant implications for non-disparagement and confidentiality clauses that will severely limit the ability for employers to use these clauses pertaining to both union and non-union employees. [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 9:57 am
The Memo Builds on the Reasoning of the NLRB in McLaren Macomb. [read post]
13 Jun 2023, 8:07 am
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has found its first target under recent guidance issued in a memo from its General Counsel claiming that noncompete agreements may violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). [read post]
12 Jun 2023, 9:59 am
To buttress her ever-expanding view of Section 7, the GC cited the Board’s recent decision in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, slip op. at 4, 7 (2023) which found non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions in severance agreements to violate the Act, finding “the ‘future rights of employees as well as the rights of the public may not be traded away’ in a manner which requires ‘forbearance from future . . . concerted activities. [read post]
2 Jun 2023, 9:06 am
Implications and Future Challenges The memorandum follows on the heels of the Federal Trade Commission issuing a proposed rule in January seeking to ban non-compete agreements, as well as the NLRB’s February ruling in McLaren Macomb, which held that severance agreements with broad non-disparagement and confidentiality provisions violate Section 7. [read post]
31 May 2023, 5:50 am
Notably, yesterday’s memo argues its expansion to non-compete restrictions is specifically based, in part, on the NLRB’s McLaren Macomb decision. [read post]
31 May 2023, 5:49 am
Following the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) highly-controversial decision in McLaren Macomb declaring most confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses in separation agreements to be unlawful, General Counsel Abruzzo this week declared her intention to seek to invalidate nearly all post-employment non-compete agreements, in a memorandum stating her prosecutorial position that “the proffer, maintenance, and enforcement” of non-compete… [read post]
31 May 2023, 5:49 am
Following the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) highly-controversial decision in McLaren Macomb declaring most confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses in separation agreements to be unlawful, General Counsel Abruzzo this week declared her intention to seek to invalidate nearly all post-employment non-compete agreements, in a memorandum stating her prosecutorial position that “the proffer, maintenance, and enforcement” of non-compete… [read post]
23 May 2023, 6:42 pm
Finally, employers should continue to be mindful of the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) recent decision in McLaren Macomb and subsequent guidance issued by the General Counsel of the NLRB, which reinstate a limit on the confidentiality, nondisclosure, and non-disparagement clauses that employers may include in severance agreements with most of their lower-level employees. [read post]
22 May 2023, 2:45 pm
Abruzzo, issued guidance on March 22, 2023, about the NLRB’s McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, decision from February 21, 2023, which reinstated a limit on the confidentiality, non-disclosure, and non-disparagement clauses that employers may include in severance agreements with most of their lower-level employees.[1] While not law, the General Counsel’s guidance is intended to address the uncertainty among employers regarding what language is deemed acceptable to… [read post]
