For
the past few years, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has been on the
warpath over employer personnel policies (and in turn, we at Labor &
Employment Law Perspectives have missed few opportunities to point out the
NLRB’s relentless campaign against employers). Policy language which had been
commonplace and acceptable for decades has suddenly been deemed to have a
“chilling” effect on employee rights under federal labor law, and therefore, is
illegal under the National Labor Relations Act. Many of these decisions have
been arbitrary, inconsistent, and lacking in common sense. Nevertheless,
employers — both union and non-union — are stuck with them, at least for the
time being. Therefore you need to stay abreast of the latest developments in
this area.
While
the dizzying array of recent NLRB decisions on personnel policy language is
often very fact specific, and seemingly dependent on factors which defy easy
description or understanding, there are certain categories of personnel
policies that have received the most recent attention from the NLRB. There are
a handful of patterns that seem to emerge from each of those areas:
Policies
on maintaining confidentiality: The NLRB has made clear that broad language requiring
employees to maintain confidentiality about workplace issues is likely to be
troublesome, and that employees must be allowed to discuss with others their
workplace concerns. Employers are, therefore, well advised to offer specific
guidance in their policies as to what is considered “confidential” and to limit
that definition to financial, strategic, or marketing information, which is
proprietary and not available to the general public.
Policies
on workplace conduct standards: The NLRB has directed that employer policies must not
foreclose certain kinds of workplace behavior violations, if doing so could be
viewed as shutting down employee ability to engage in protected activity under
federal labor law. For example, policy statements that “offensive” or
“disrespectful” behavior is unacceptable have been found unlawful by the NLRB.
While reading NLRB tea leaves in this area is a daunting task, we can say that
employer policies are less likely to be put through the NLRB grinder if they
describe serious or illegal misconduct such as insubordination, threats, or
harassment.
Conflict
of interest policies:
Broad language prohibiting employees from engaging in actions that are in
conflict with employer interests is very likely to draw fire from the NLRB.
Instead, policies in this area should more specifically focus on conflicts with
employer business or financial interests, or engaging in activities that would
interfere with an employee’s judgment in performing his or her job
responsibilities.
Policies
on interactions with third parties: Employer policies that prohibit employees from speaking to
the media or to government agencies will almost certainly be struck down by
today’s NLRB. Instead, employers should make clear that employees, if speaking
to the media, should make clear that they are not speaking on behalf of the
employer and are expressing their own views. Additionally, any limitations on
employees speaking with government agencies or outside investigators are very
likely to be struck down.
Social
media policies:
The NLRB has been very sensitive about social media policies that may restrict
employee social media activities. Broad language prohibiting employees from
making comments on social media “not in the employer’s best interests” or which
“reflect poorly on the company” are likely going to be found unlawful. More
pinpointed restrictions, such as prohibiting employees from sharing properly
defined confidential or proprietary information, are more likely to survive
NLRB review. Additionally, employees may be instructed that they should make
clear that their comments on social media do not reflect the official views of
the company.
Solicitation/distribution
policies:
This favorite target of NLRB criticism continues to be an area which employers
must look at very carefully to ensure that there are no words, phrases, or
sentences that may be in violation of NLRB dogma in this area. Periodic legal
review of these policies is a must.
Policies
restricting employees’ ability to leave work: Many employers maintain policies that prohibit employees
from leaving work without permission, or walking off the job. Perhaps not
surprisingly, the NLRB has taken the position that such a policy may lead
employees to believe that they cannot engage in protected strike activity or
other protected job actions and is, therefore, unlawful. An exception to this
has been recognized for employees who provide direct patient care services, but
the general issue remains.
Unions
are more and more often filing unfair labor practice charges with the NLRB
about personnel policy language in an effort to gain organizing leverage
against non-union facilities. For these reasons, employers of all kinds should
review their policies regularly in order to ensure they do not violate the
latest and not-so-greatest NLRB standards in this ever-changing area.
Source: Foley
& Lardner LLP
No comments:
Post a Comment