rudnick

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-30-26

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 21:18:23 GMT

Subject: Update: Key NLRB Developments as of March 30, 2026 – Implications for Employers

Dear Employers,

I hope this email finds you well. I wanted to provide a brief update on key recent developments at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and related federal court decisions that may impact your labor relations strategies.

1. Sixth Circuit Rejects NLRB's Cemex Bargaining Order Framework. On March 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit became the first federal appellate court to invalidate key aspects of the NLRB's 2023 Cemex Construction Materials Pacific decision.

A. Under Cemex, the NLRB could issue bargaining orders requiring employers to recognize and bargain with a union—even after employees voted against unionization—if the Board found certain unfair labor practices undermined the election process.

B. The Sixth Circuit ruled that the NLRB exceeded its authority by effectively creating a broad new rule through adjudication rather than formal rulemaking. The court declined to enforce a bargaining order in Brown-Forman Corp. v. NLRB and signaled a return toward the more established Gissel standard for remedial bargaining orders.

This decision is a notable limitation on union-friendly remedies and may influence similar challenges in other circuits.

2. NLRB Clarifies Cemex Election Timing Requirements

In a March 25, 2026, decision (St. John's College, 374 NLRB No. 72), the NLRB held that the two-week "prompt" filing window referenced in Cemex does not create a strict deadline that invalidates an otherwise valid election petition.

A. Employers who delay filing an RM petition beyond two weeks after a union's demand for recognition may still face unfair labor practice liability, but the election petition itself can proceed.

B. This ruling provides some practical flexibility for employers while Cemex remains under scrutiny.

3. Other Notable Updates

A. Joint-Employer Standard: The NLRB finalized a rule in late February 2026 that largely restores the 2020 Trump-era joint-employer standard, requiring "substantial direct and immediate control" over essential terms and conditions of employment. This narrows potential joint-employer liability compared to the broader Biden-era approach.

B. Recent Board Decisions: The NLRB continues to issue decisions (e.g., on March 25–27, 2026, including cases involving healthcare facilities and other sectors). The agency has also seen leadership changes, with President Trump appointing James R. Murphy as NLRB Chairman on March 27, 2026.

C. General Counsel Guidance: In February 2026, GC Memorandum 26-03 directed Regional Offices to prioritize certain cases and adjust handling of workplace rule/policy charges.

These developments reflect a shifting landscape at the NLRB, with greater judicial oversight of agency actions and a potential move toward more balanced enforcement.

If your organization faces union organizing drives, bargaining obligations, or workplace policy reviews, these changes could affect risk assessments and compliance strategies.

I recommend reviewing any pending matters in light of the Cemex developments, particularly in the Sixth Circuit or similar jurisdictions.

Please let me know if you'd like to discuss how these updates specifically apply to your business, schedule a call, or receive more detailed analysis of any particular case. I'm happy to provide tailored guidance.

Best regards,

Sanford Rudnick JD

800-326-3046

www.theunionexpert.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-23-26

Tue, 24 Mar 2026 10:04:38 GMT

Subject: Update: Key NLRB Developments as of March 23, 2026 – Implications for Employers

Dear Employers,

I wanted to provide a timely update on recent developments at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that could impact union organizing, bargaining obligations, joint employer liability, and unfair labor practice enforcement. With the Board now operating under a Republican majority and new General Counsel leadership, we are seeing a clear shift toward more employer-friendly standards and priorities.

March 17, 2026, Decisions

1. 374 NLRB No. 63: Blue School (Case 02-CA-294227, Region 2 - New York)

This involves Blue School, a private school/educational institution in New York City (241 Water Street). The case stems from unfair labor practice charges, likely related to employee rights during union activity or related labor issues (e.g., interference, discrimination, or refusal to bargain). Earlier related filings date back to 2022 (e.g., 02-CA-292782), suggesting ongoing or repeated allegations possibly involving faculty/staff organizing, communications from school leadership about union support, or workplace policies. The Board issued its ruling on March 17, but detailed facts (e.g., specific violations like coercive statements or discharges) require reviewing the full opinion PDF.

2. 374 NLRB No. 62: Jones Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc. (Case 20-CA-328308, Region 20 - San Francisco area)

Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) is a global real estate services firm. The charge involves unfair labor practices, potentially related to employee treatment in property management, maintenance, or related roles (common in JLL cases). This could include issues like surveillance, interrogation, threats, or changes in working conditions during union efforts. Specific facts aren't highlighted in overviews, but it's a standard 8(a) violation case affirmed or modified by the Board on March 17.

March 12, 2026 Decision

3. 374 NLRB No. 60: Dart Container Corporation and Solo Cup Operating Corporation (Case 13-CA-299697, Region 13 - Chicago)

Dart Container (a major manufacturer of disposable foodservice products) and its affiliate Solo Cup. This appears to be an unfair labor practice case, possibly involving manufacturing/warehouse employees (common for Dart). Allegations may include unlawful discharges, threats, or interference with protected concerted activity (e.g., complaints about wages, safety, or working conditions). The Board decided on March 12; like others, core facts come from ALJ hearings on evidence of NLRA violations.

March 11, 2026 Decision

4. 374 NLRB No. 58: Portillo's Hot Dogs, LLC (Case 13-CA-354045, Region 13 - Chicago)

Portillo's, a Chicago-based restaurant chain known for hot dogs and Italian beef. Likely involves restaurant workers (e.g., servers, cooks) and charges of unfair practices such as unlawful surveillance, discipline for union talk, or refusal to bargain if unionized. Issued March 11.

Related Notable Development (Not a Board Decision, but Influential)

5. Brown-Forman Corporation v. NLRB (Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, March 6/9, 2026)

This isn't an NLRB Board decision but a key appellate review of one.

Facts: During a union organizing drive by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters at Brown-Forman's Woodford Reserve bourbon distillery in Kentucky, the company announced wage increases ($1/hour then $4/hour across-the-board) and benefit changes (e.g., holiday flexibility) amid growing union support. Management held mandatory meetings warning that unionization could limit wage discretion and gifted employees bourbon bottles shortly before the election. The union lost the election, but the NLRB (relying on its 2023 Cemex standard) set aside the results and ordered bargaining due to unfair labor practices interfering with employee free choice. The Sixth Circuit upheld findings of violations but rejected the Cemex-based bargaining order as improper "rulemaking" via adjudication, remanding under the older Gissel standard (which requires stricter proof for non-election bargaining orders). This limits Cemex in the Sixth Circuit.

These March 2026 Board decisions are routine unfair labor practice resolutions (no major policy shifts noted in summaries), often affirming ALJ findings on employer conduct violating Sections 8(a)(1), (3), (5), etc.

For precise facts, allegations, evidence, and holdings, download the PDFs from the NLRB's Board Decisions page ( nlrb.gov/cases-decisions/decisions/board-decisions ) — search by volume 374 or date.

The site had maintenance around March 23, but decisions are now accessible. If you're interested in a specific case (e.g., one of these or another from the period), or want me to focus on ALJ decisions.

6.If your organization is facing union activity, an unfair labor practice charge, or has questions about how these cases apply to your operations, please reach out—I'd be happy to discuss tailored strategies or review specific policies

Best regards,

Sanford Rudnick

800-326-3036

www.theunionexpert.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-9-26

Mon, 09 Mar 2026 21:50:36 GMT

Dear Employers,

I wanted to bring to your attention some key recent developments at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) that could impact our labor relations, workplace policies, unfair labor practice exposure, and joint employer considerations.

1.Recent Board Decisions (Issued March 4–5, 2026)

The NLRB published several decisions in Volume 374, primarily on March 4 and 5:

2.Barista Parlor Germantown, LLC (374 NLRB No. 57; Case 10-CA-320196; Issued March 5, 2026)This appears to be a standard ULP case, likely involving allegations of interference with employee Section 7 rights (protected concerted activity), possibly related to discipline, discharge, or union-related issues in a hospitality/retail setting. No major precedent shift noted.

3. Rosewood Care, LLC d/b/a Rosewood Rehabilitation and Nursing (374 NLRB No. 53; Case 03-CA-297817; Issued March 4, 2026)

Healthcare/nursing home context. Common in such cases: allegations of unlawful discharge or discipline of employees for union activity, failure to bargain over changes, or interference (e.g., threats or surveillance). The Board likely affirmed or modified an ALJ's findings on violations and remedies like reinstatement/backpay.

4. Pfizer, Inc. (374 NLRB No. 55; Case 10-CA-175850; Issued March 4, 2026)

This is a long-running or supplemental decision (original charge dates back years). It involves workplace policies, specifically upholding the legality of an arbitration confidentiality rule under Section 8(a)(1). The Board dismissed complaints alleging that maintaining certain confidentiality provisions in arbitration agreements violated employees' rights to discuss terms/conditions of employment or engage in concerted activity. This reinforces that narrowly tailored confidentiality rules (especially in arbitration contexts) are often lawful absent evidence of chilling protected activity.

5.Healthy Minds, Inc. and House of Hope of Bastrop, LLC, a Single Integrated Enterprise (374 NLRB No. 56; Case 15-CA-231767; Issued March 4, 2026)

Single integrated enterprise finding means the Board treated multiple entities as one employer for liability purposes. Likely involves ULP allegations (e.g., refusal to bargain, unilateral changes, or discriminatory actions) across related organizations in a mental health or social services setting.

6.Tremont Chicago, LLC (374 NLRB No. 54; Case 13-CA-343007; Issued March 4, 2026) Chicago-area case, possibly hospitality or property management. Typical issues: Section 8(a)(1) interference, (a)(3) discrimination, or (a)(5) bargaining violations.

7. Titan Medical Center LLC (374 NLRB No. 51; Case 14-CA-347704; Issued March 4, 2026)

Healthcare employer. Likely centered on union-related discharges, bargaining obligations, or unilateral changes to terms/conditions.

These address various unfair labor practice issues (e.g., discharges, unilateral changes, bargaining obligations). Full slip opinions are available on the NLRB website. While not sweeping reversals, they reflect ongoing enforcement in core NLRA areas.

8. Shift in Case Handling Priorities (GC Memorandum 26-03, Issued February 27, 2026)New General Counsel Crystal S. Carey issued guidance directing Regional Offices to prioritize efficient resolutions, including:

Encouraging early and unconditional settlements (even in "serious" cases).
Focusing investigations on high-priority matters and protecting free association rights.
Pulling back from aggressive pursuit of certain theories (e.g., no longer seeking to overrule Ex-Cell-O Corp. for expanded remedies in refusal-to-bargain cases).
Limiting scrutiny of workplace rules/policies unless they are facially unlawful or demonstrably enforced in a way that chills rights.

9. This signals a more restrained, backlog-reducing approach compared to prior enforcement, which could benefit employers by allowing quicker resolutions and reduced resource-intensive probes.

10.Joint Employer Rule Withdrawal (Effective February 27, 2026)

The NLRB formally withdrew the 2023 Biden-era joint employer rule (previously vacated by court) and reinstated the narrower 2020 standard. This requires "substantial direct and immediate control" over essential terms/conditions of employment for joint employer status—reducing potential liability in franchisor, staffing, or contractor arrangements.

11. These changes suggest a reset toward more employer-friendly processing and standards, though the Board continues routine case activity (e.g., ongoing investigations like the Henry Ford Health Genesys Hospital dispute noted March 4). I recommend we review our handbook policies, arbitration/confidentiality provisions, bargaining practices (if applicable), and any multi-entity relationships in light of this.

12. Please let me know if you'd like me to pull full decisions/memos, coordinate with counsel, or discuss next steps. I'm happy to assist.

Best regards,

Sanford Rudnick

sandy@rudnickpro.com

800-326-3036

www.theunionexpert.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-1-26

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 22:55:01 GMT

Dear Employer Clients,

As of March 1, 2026, we are providing a legal update on recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) developments, with emphasis on precedential case law that continues to shape employer obligations under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Below are key decisions and their practical implications:

1. Workplace Rules and Handbook Policies – Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023)

In Stericycle, the Board adopted a more employee-protective standard for evaluating facially neutral workplace rules. Under this framework, a rule is presumptively unlawful if employees could reasonably interpret it to chill Section 7 activity. The burden then shifts to the employer to demonstrate that the rule advances legitimate and substantial business interests and is narrowly tailored.

Employer Impact:

Policies concerning civility, confidentiality, social media, recording, and investigations should be carefully reviewed. Overbroad language — even without evidence of discriminatory enforcement — may invite challenge.

2. Bargaining Orders and Union Recognition – Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC, 372 NLRB No. 130 (2023)

Cemex significantly altered the union recognition framework. When a union presents evidence of majority support, an employer must either voluntarily recognize the union or promptly file for an election. If the employer commits any unfair labor practice that would require setting aside the election, the Board may issue a bargaining order requiring recognition without a rerun election.

Employer Impact:

Risk exposure during organizing campaigns has increased. Even minor ULP findings during a campaign may now result in mandatory bargaining orders.

3. Severance and Confidentiality Agreements – McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (2023)

The Board held that offering severance agreements containing overly broad confidentiality or non-disparagement provisions may violate Section 8(a)(1), even if the employee does not sign the agreement.

Employer Impact:

Template severance agreements should be reviewed to ensure restrictions do not interfere with employees’ rights to discuss workplace conditions or file charges with the Board.

4. Conduct During Labor Disputes – Lion Elastomers LLC II, 372 NLRB No. 83 (2023)

The Board reinstated a more protective standard for employee conduct occurring in the context of protected concerted activity. Employees engaged in such activity are afforded broader leeway, even where conduct would otherwise violate workplace rules.

Employer Impact:

Disciplinary decisions involving heated workplace exchanges tied to labor activity should be evaluated carefully and documented with legitimate, non-retaliatory justifications.

5. Expanded Remedies – Thryv, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 22 (2022)

The Board expanded available remedies to include foreseeable consequential damages resulting from unfair labor practices (e.g., credit card interest, medical expenses, or other financial harms).

Employer Impact:

Potential financial exposure in ULP cases has increased beyond traditional back pay and reinstatement remedies.

6. Election Procedures and Regional Authority

The Board continues to defer to Regional Director determinations in representation cases and maintain expedited election procedures. Employers should be prepared for compressed timelines and heightened scrutiny of campaign conduct.

7. Practical Compliance Considerations

Given these developments, we recommend:

Conducting a privileged audit of handbook provisions under the Stericycle framework
Reviewing organizing-response protocols in light of Cemex
Updating severance templates post-McLaren Macomb
Training supervisors on lawful communications (TIPS framework)
Carefully assessing disciplinary actions tied to protected activity
Evaluating potential financial exposure under expanded remedial standards

8. The Board’s current posture reflects a broader interpretation of employee protections under Section 7. Proactive compliance remains the most effective method of minimizing litigation risk and operational disruption.

Please contact us if you would like a tailored policy review or strategic guidance regarding a pending matter by contacting Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or by email at sandy@rudnickpro.com , or the website, www.theunionexpert.com

Sincerely,

Sanford Rudnick JD

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 2-16-26

Tue, 17 Feb 2026 22:16:15 GMT

1. The primary recent NLRB development you asked about (from my previous summary) centers on the SpaceX case, where the Board dropped its unfair labor practice complaint in early February 2026. Here's a clear breakdown of the key case facts, drawn from official filings, agency letters, and consistent reporting across sources:

2. Core Incident (2022)

A. In June 2022, a group of SpaceX engineers circulated an internal open letter/company-wide memo.

B. The letter criticized CEO Elon Musk's public behavior and statements on social media (including X/Twitter), describing him as a "frequent source of embarrassment" to the company and calling for SpaceX leadership to distance itself from his comments (e.g., those downplaying harassment allegations against him).

C. The letter was framed as protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), where employees discuss workplace concerns collectively.

D. Shortly after the letter circulated, SpaceX fired at least eight employees involved in drafting or distributing it.

3. NLRB Involvement (2022–2024)

A. Affected former employees filed unfair labor practice charges with the NLRB (e.g., primary case: 19-CA-309274, filed December 20, 2022; others consolidated).

B. The NLRB's regional office investigated and, in January 2024, issued a formal complaint against SpaceX.

C. Allegations: The firings violated Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA by interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of concerted activities for mutual aid or protection (retaliatory discharges for protected speech/organizing).

D. Remedies sought in the complaint included reinstatement, back pay, cessation of interference, and (in some accounts) public apologies or notices.

4. SpaceX's Challenges

A. SpaceX sued the NLRB in federal court (Western District of Texas), arguing the agency's structure was unconstitutional (e.g., removal protections for Board members/ALJs violated separation of powers).

B. Courts issued preliminary injunctions in parts of the litigation (e.g., Fifth Circuit involvement noted in related dockets).

C. Separately, SpaceX argued it fell under the Railway Labor Act (RLA) jurisdiction (governing railroads and airlines) rather than the NLRA, as a "common carrier by air" involved in interstate/foreign commerce and government mail transport.

5. Key Turning Point (January 2026)

A. On January 14, 2026, the National Mediation Board (NMB)—which oversees RLA-covered industries—issued an advisory opinion in a related proceeding.

B. The NMB ruled that SpaceX qualifies under the RLA because "space transport includes air travel within the same airspace as airlines," treating it as a common carrier by air (despite arguments from fired employees that commercial spaceflight isn't equivalent to traditional airlines serving the public).

C. This determination excluded SpaceX from NLRA coverage.

6. NLRB Dismissal (February 2026)

A. On or around February 6–9, 2026, NLRB Regional Director Danielle Pierce (Region 19, Seattle) issued a dismissal letter to the charging parties' attorneys.

B. Key quote from the letter: "On January 14, 2026, the NMB issued its decision finding that the Employer is subject to the RLA as a common carrier by air engaged in interstate or foreign commerce as well as a carrier by air transporting mail for or under contract with the United States Government. Accordingly, the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction over the Employer and, therefore, I am dismissing your charge."

C. The NLRB formally dismissed the complaint, abandoning the case entirely.

D. This also signaled the agency would not pursue future enforcement actions against SpaceX under the NLRA.

7. Outcome and Implications

A. Major win for SpaceX/Elon Musk: Ends the multi-year battle, shifts potential labor disputes to the RLA (which has stricter unionization rules, no easy card-check, and mandatory mediation/arbitration).

8. If you need any assistance with the NLRB concerning unfair labor practice charges or any other labor relations matter, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or by email at

sandy@rudnickpro.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT: NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 2-9-26

Tue, 10 Feb 2026 21:57:49 GMT

The NLRB issued an updated docketing protocol for unfair labor practice charges (from Memorandum GC 26-01, issued December 2025, with clarification on January 28, 2026). This requires charging parties to submit supporting evidence/documentation early (within ~2 weeks) before full docketing/assignment. The agency clarified this aligns with longstanding practices, aims to improve efficiency, reduce delays from overloaded agents, and does not impose new substantive burdens or change dismissal standards.

2. Here are the key facts from the most recent published NLRB Board decisions as of early February 2026 (issued February 4, 2026, in the 374 NLRB series). These are primarily summary judgment cases involving employer refusals to bargain after union certification, where the Board adopted findings without full hearings due to lack of genuine disputes.

3. Hackensack Meridian Health Carrier Clinic (374 NLRB No. 35, Case 22-CA-360422)

Issuance Date: February 4, 2026.
Employer: Hackensack Meridian Health Carrier Clinic (a behavioral health services provider in Belle Mead, New Jersey).
Union: District 1199J, National Union of Hospital and Healthcare Employees.
Key Facts:
The union won a secret-ballot representation election in May 2024 among mental health technicians at the facility.
The Regional Director certified the union as the exclusive bargaining representative in October 2024.
The Board denied the employer's request for review of the certification in December 2024.
Despite certification, the employer refused to recognize or bargain with the union.
Board Holding: The Board granted summary judgment, finding the employer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by refusing to bargain in good faith. The decision enforces the union's certification and requires the employer to bargain upon request.

4. Winco Foods (374 NLRB No. 37, Case 27-CA-345285)

Issuance Date: February 4, 2026.
Employer: Winco Holdings, Inc. (operating as Winco Foods, a grocery store in Salt Lake City, Utah; also referred to as Winco Foods in some contexts).
Union: International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local 22.
Key Facts:
The union won a representation election in February 2024 for employees at the store.
The Regional Director certified the union in April 2024.
The Board denied the employer's request for review in June 2024.
The union made repeated demands to bargain starting in February 2024.
The employer refused to recognize or bargain with the union beginning in May 2024.
Board Holding: The Board granted summary judgment, finding the employer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the NLRA by refusing to bargain in good faith with the certified union. The decision orders the employer to bargain upon request and cease refusals.

5. If you need any assistance with the NLRB concerning unfair labor practice charges or any other labor relations matter, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or by emails at sandy@rudnickpro.com .

An Employer made Unilateral Changes to their Contract after Entering a Me-To Agreement with the Union.

Tue, 20 Jan 2026 22:19:03 GMT

January 20, 2026

1. The NLRB resumes making decisions on cases after nearly a year of not having a quorum at the NLRB.

2. The first case was Fields Fire Protection where an Employer made Unilateral Changes to Contract after Entering a Me-To Agreement with the Union.

3. Fields Fire Protection LLC

4. Case: Fields Fire Prot., LLC, 04-CA-311903 – ALJ decision adopted Jan. 8, 2026

5. Issue: Unfair labor practices involving refusal to honor collective-bargaining obligations.

ALJ Findings:

5A. The employer entered into a “me too” agreement incorporating a multiemployer collective-bargaining agreement.

5B. It then ceased making required contributions to union health, welfare, pension, education funds and failed to remit union dues (i.e., failed to comply with contract terms).

5C. This conduct violated Section 8(a)(5) and (a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act (failure to bargain and interference with employee rights).

6. Remedy:

The order requires the employer to:

6A. Cease and desist from failing to bargain and remit contributions;

6B. Rescind unilateral changes;

6C. Make whole lost dues and benefit contributions with interest; and

6D. Post required employee notices.

If no exceptions were filed, the ALJ decision became the Board’s order.

7. If you have any questions relating to the case, Fields Fire Protection, or any other labor relations issue, please contact my office at 800-326-3046.

sis 24/7.

NEW POSSIBLE ELECTION DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE NLRB IN 2026

Tue, 06 Jan 2026 03:24:31 GMT

January 5, 2026

NEW ELECTION DEVELOPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 2026

1. If you want the new law changes in your state please contact my office for the changes in law in your state.

2. Expected Changes in 2026: Following Senate confirmations in late 2025, the NLRB now has a Republican majority (the first since 2021), along with a new General Counsel. This shift is widely expected to lead to more employer-friendly adjustments in labor policy, including union election procedures:

3.Potential reversal or modification of pro-union precedents and rules, such as:

4. Overruling or narrowing the Cemex decision (which allowed bargaining orders without elections in some unfair labor practice cases).

5. Revisiting accelerated election timelines to allow more time for employer communication and campaigns.

6. Limiting or eliminating the restored blocking charge policy and voluntary recognition bars.

7. Returning to standards that make decertification easier or restrict "micro-units."

8. The new majority is likely to prioritize case decisions over new rulemaking initially, but procedural changes could emerge through adjudications or future rules as the Board addresses its backlog.

9. The Republican-led Board may also face quorum or composition changes later in 2026 (e.g., if a Democratic member's term expires without replacement), but as of early 2026, the shift toward balancing employer rights is anticipated.

10. If you need any assistance concerning elections at the NLRB or any other labor relations, please call H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 800-326-3046, www.the unionexpert.com for a free case analysis 24/7.

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

Wed, 31 Dec 2025 09:58:07 GMT

LIFE VISION

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

Conflict Resolution Specialists and Labor Consultants Presents:

LIFE IS PEACE

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING

THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

Life is Peace 5 step formula will help resolve any conflict in the world.

Every person, business, state, and nation must have the formula to resolve conflict, prevent adverse consequences and violence.

“It is with the book “Life is Peace”.

Did you know?

The book “Life is Peace” can be found in libraries and museums around the world

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

Sanford Rudnick is a graduate of UCLA and Lincoln Law School. He started a management consulting firm in 1980. He has represented about 1000 Employers including many Fortune 500 Companies throughout the US.

The formula in the book LIFE IS PEACE can resolve any conflict. Each letter in the word PEACE stands for a specific

principle:

P stands for Process.
E stands for Explanation of Positions
A stands for Acceptance of the Process
C stands for Compromise.
E stands for containment of Emotions.

The Air Force, Marines, West Point, and many libraries, museums, and religious institutions around the world have this

book on how to Resolve Conflict. Please go to www.4lifevision.com and visit our reference page to see the hundreds of

references from libraries, museums, and religious institutions.

Download the book at https://www.4lifevision.com/ or call 1-800-326-3046 for a copy. Also, there are private sessions available

for individuals, businesses, schools, and seminars available for any conflict resolution. For Conflict Resolution Coaching

call H. Sanford Rudnick at 1-800-326-3046.

Receive a green wrist band with the word PEACE on the band as a gift with Life is Peace book purchase.

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

1990 No. California Blvd. S 830

Walnut Creek, Ca. 94596

1-800-326-3046

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates is a full-service Conflict Resolution and Labor Relations firm that uses offices around the US and countries that helps you resolve any conflicts with your country, state, schools, businesses and individuals. H Sanford Rudnick & Associates does seminars and conflict resolution coaching for you which includes a book on the resolution of conflict and other materials to make give you a more productive environment. Remember resolving conflict is the key to life. If you have any questions about the cost of the seminar or other services, please call 800-326-3046 and ask for Sanford Rudnick.

NLRB REGAINS QUORUM TO DECIDE APPEALS

Mon, 22 Dec 2025 22:24:42 GMT

THE RUDNICK REPORT: A WEEKLY UPDATE AT THE NLRB

Welcome to This Week's Edition

Dear Readers,

1. The NLRB Finally Regains a Quorum. 

2. The U.S. Senate confirmed two nominees to the National Labor Relations Board, restoring its ability to decide cases after nearly a Year without enough members to act on appeals and policy decisions.

3.Scott Mayer and James Murphy were confirmed as Board members, and Crystal Carey was confirmed as General Counsel .

4.This restores the NLRB’s decision-making authority following months of paralysis after a Board member was fired earlier in 2025.

5. Implications

6.The Board can now resume issuing decisions on appeals from Regional Directors and Administrative Law Judges (ALJs).

7.A Republican-majority Board may revisit or overturn a number of recent union-friendly precedents issued during the prior Democratic majority.

8. Republican-Majority Board Expected to Shift NLRA Interpretation

9.With a restored quorum and new General Counsel:

10.The Board’s priorities are expected to change, likely favoring employer interests in areas such as:

A. Captive audience meetings (employer-mandated anti-union sessions),

B. Post-election representation rights,

C. Monetary remedies in ULP cases.

11.These issues were part of broader Republican policy goals and could be revisited given the new majority’s composition.

If your firm needs any assistance in understanding any new developments at the NLRB or any other labor issues, please call H. Sanford Rudnick JD of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates, at 1-800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com 24/7.

THE RUDNICK REPORT: A WEEKLY UPDATE AT THE NLRB

Mon, 01 Dec 2025 22:02:13 GMT

THE RUDNICK REPORT

December 1, 2025

Volume 1, Issue 3

Welcome to This Week's Edition

Dear Readers,

Can Employees Request the Union or Force a Withdrawal of an Election Petition?

1.Employees cannot force the union to withdraw the petition, as the union controls the filing and withdrawal process.

2.However, employees can voluntarily communicate their opposition to the union and request withdrawal. This is protected under Section 7 of the NLRA, which guarantees employees' rights to support, oppose, or engage in concerted activities regarding union representation, including petitioning the union directly.

3.Voluntary Basis: Employees may approach union representatives individually or collectively (e.g., via a disaffection petition signed by multiple workers stating they no longer support the union) to urge withdrawal. This is lawful and does not violate NLRB rules, as long as it is not coerced by the employer. Employer involvement in soliciting such requests could constitute an unfair labor practice (ULP) under Section 8(a)(1), such as interfering with employees' Section 7 rights.

4.Effectiveness: The union is not obligated to comply with the request. If the union refuses and proceeds, employees' recourse is to vote "no" in the NLRB-conducted secret ballot election. A majority "no" vote defeats the union, and no representation is certified.

5.Timing During "Election Petition" Phase: The question specifies "during an election petition," which aligns with the pre-election period after filing but before the vote. Requests here are permissible, but once ballots are impounded (post-election), the focus shifts to objections or challenges, not petition withdrawal.

6.If your firm needs any assistance in understanding the election process , please call H. Sanford Rudnick JD of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates or any other labor issue, please call 1-800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com 24/7.

THE RUDNICK REPORT: A WEEKLY UPDATE ON THE NLRB

Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:58:37 GMT

THE RUDNICK REPORT Weekly NLRB Update

November 17, 2025

Volume 1, Issue 1

Welcome to This Week's Edition

Dear Readers,

1. As the NLRB resumes full operations following its recent shutdown—reopening on November 13, 2025, with tolled due dates for filings and service—this edition of The Rudnick Report focuses on pivotal judicial developments shaping labor law enforcement.

2.The Board has yet to issue new decisions in October or November amid the disruption, but federal courts have been active, deepening circuit splits on remedies and employee expression. Below, we highlight four key cases from late October through early November, offering summaries, holdings, and practical implications for employers and unions alike. Stay tuned for post-reopening Board actions in coming weeks. As always, your feedback is welcome—reply to sandy@rudnickpro.com

Best regards,

Sanford Rudnick JD

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

www.theunionexpert.com

800-326-3046

Recent Developments

3.Sixth Circuit Joins Third and Fifth in Rejecting NLRB's Expanded Remedies: NLRB v. Starbucks Corp. (Nov. 5, 2025)In a split decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the NLRB's finding that Starbucks violated the NLRA by terminating a union-organizing barista in Ann Arbor, Michigan, but struck down the Board's award of "Thryv"-style expanded remedies.

4.The employee, fired in April 2022 after wearing union pins and participating in organizing efforts, was deemed discharged for protected activities. However, the court ruled that the NLRA's § 10(c) limits remedies to equitable relief like backpay and reinstatement, not compensatory damages for indirect harms such as childcare costs or rent penalties, citing Seventh Amendment concerns over jury trials. Implications: This aligns the Sixth Circuit with the Third and Fifth, creating a clear split with the Ninth Circuit (see below). Employers in these jurisdictions face narrower liability, but the uncertainty persists until Supreme Court intervention, potentially capping NLRB awards at status-quo restoration.

5. Ninth Circuit Upholds Expanded Remedies for Macy's Strikers: IUOE, Local 39 v. NLRB (Oct. 21, 2025)

6. Contrasting the growing opposition, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the NLRB's order requiring Macy's to compensate former strikers for foreseeable financial harms beyond traditional backpay, stemming from the retailer's refusal to rehire them post-strike. The decision emphasizes the Board's discretion to "make whole" employees under the NLRA, including indirect losses tied to unfair labor practices. Implications: This bolsters the NLRB's aggressive remedial stance in the West, heightening exposure for West Coast Employers.

7.The split—now Third, Fifth, and Sixth against Ninth—signals a likely Supreme Court showdown, urging multistate companies to revisit compliance strategies.

8. Eighth Circuit Greenlights Employer Restrictions on Employee Expression: NLRB v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (Nov. 6, 2025)

9.The Eighth Circuit unanimously vacated an NLRB ruling that Home Depot unlawfully fired a Minnesota employee for refusing to remove a "Black Lives Matter" slogan from their work apron in 2021, amid post-George Floyd unrest. While the court sidestepped whether the display was protected concerted activity under Section 7, it held that the NLRB ignored "special circumstances" justifying the dress code ban, including political neutrality, employee safety, and customer relations in a tense environment. Implications: Employers gain leeway to enforce neutral policies during volatile periods, provided they document business justifications and apply rules consistently. However, in calmer times, broad prohibitions risk NLRB scrutiny—train managers on context-specific enforcement to avoid pitfalls.

10. Union Petitions Supreme Court to Curb Fifth Circuit's "Easy Injunctions" on NLRB Proceedings (Oct. 31, 2025)

11.The Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) asked the Supreme Court to review Fifth Circuit rulings allowing employers to enjoin NLRB actions based solely on alleged unconstitutionality of Board members' and ALJs' job protections, without proving actual harm. This approach, diverging from six other circuits, has stalled routine cases in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, undermining Board functionality. Implications: A grant of certiorari could standardize injunctive relief standards nationwide, reducing forum-shopping and stabilizing NLRB operations. Unions and employees may see faster resolutions, while employers in the Fifth Circuit face interim uncertainty—monitor docket updates closely.

12. Quick Stats: NLRB Filings Snapshot (Post-Reopening Data Pending; Last Available: Week Ending Oct. 31, 2025)

THE RUDNICK REPORT: An Employer could Terminate an Employee for Wearing a BLM Pin which violated its Neutral Dress Code.

Tue, 11 Nov 2025 17:24:09 GMT

An Employer could Terminate an Employee for using a BLM pin on his Apron which violated the Company’s Policy for having a Neutral Dress Code.

1. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. NLRB (8th Cir., No. 24-1406, decided November 6, 2025)Key Facts: An employee at a Home Depot store near Minneapolis displayed "BLM" on his uniform apron amid ongoing racial tensions following George Floyd's murder in 2020, including store-specific incidents of discrimination and vandalism. The store enforced its neutral dress code prohibiting political messages, leading to the employee's constructive discharge after refusal to remove it. The NLRB (in a 3-1 decision from February 2024) found this violated Sections 7 and 8(a)(1) of the NLRA, ruling the display was protected concerted activity tied to workplace racial issues.

2.Holdings: The Eighth Circuit granted Home Depot's petition for review, vacated the NLRB order, and remanded. Assuming arguendo the activity was protected, the court upheld the employer's "special circumstances" defense under Republic Aviation Corp. v. NLRB and Eastex, Inc. v. NLRB, citing risks to employee/customer safety, potential dissension, and public image in a high-tension post-Floyd environment with local unrest (e.g., looting affecting the store). The court criticized the NLRB for undervaluing these business justifications.

3.Implications: Reinforces employers' ability to enforce uniform policies restricting divisive messages in volatile contexts, even if linked to workplace concerns, while offering alternatives (e.g., DEI pins). It limits NLRB overreach in second-guessing employer safety and image decisions, potentially influencing similar cases in customer-facing roles.

4. If you need any assistance in determining what an employee can put on his uniform or any other human resource need, please contact Sanford Rudnick to respond to your health care union at 800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT: The NLRB ruled that Macy's Unlawfully Locked Out its Employees after a 3 Month Strike and Ordered Damages against Macy’s.

Mon, 27 Oct 2025 23:17:38 GMT

9th - Damages to union members unlawfully locked out after a strike are upheld.

International Union of Operating Engineers v. NLRB (9th Cir 10/20/2025)

http://case.lawmemo.com/9/operatingengineers1.pdf

1.The Union charged Macy's with unfair labor practices under the NLRA.

2.During a dispute over a successor contract, the union went on strike for three months.

3.The union ended the strike after several months and offered to return to work unconditionally.

4.Macy's then locked out union members.

5.The Board found that Macy's had violated the NLRA.

6.The 9th circuit affirmed the Board's order, finding that the employer did not have legitimate and substantial business justifications for the lockout.

7.The court denied the union's motion for extraordinary damages, and also upheld the Board's determination that the damages awarded were appropriate.

8.The court held that the issue is appropriately heard at upcoming compliance hearings related to the order and declined addressing the employer's arguments on that issue.

9. If your firm needs any assistance in determining what is a lawful lockout of your employees during negotiations, negotiating a favorable contract or to go nonunion or any other labor relations issue, please call H. Sanford Rudnick JD of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates or any other labor issue, please call 1-800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com 24/7.

FOUR TYPES OF STRIKES ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE NLRB ACT

Mon, 20 Oct 2025 22:29:35 GMT

1. An employee's right to strike is an important aspect of the right to organize but is not without limitations. Certain strikes qualify as protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), but not all strikes are protected. The main types of strikes covered by the NLRA are:

2(a) Unfair labor practice strikes, which protest employers' illegal activities.

2(b) Economic strikes, which may occur when there are disputes over wages or benefits.

2(c) Recognition strikes, which are intended to force employers to recognize unions.

2(d) Jurisdictional strikes, which are concerted refusals to work to affirm members' right to particular job assignments and to protest the assignment of work to another union or to unorganized employees.

3. A unionized employee's right to reinstatement after a strike ends varies based on the type of strike and the underlying reason for the strike. Employers are allowed to hire replacement workers during unfair labor practice strikes and economic strikes.

4. Economic strikers who are striking as a result of the employer's failure to reach an agreement over wages or other working conditions may be permanently replaced but cannot be terminated. Strikers who are striking as a result of an unfair labor practice cannot be permanently replaced or terminated.

5. At the end of a strike, unfair labor practice strikers are entitled to be reinstated to their former positions (even if that means the employer has to terminate replacement workers) as long as they have not participated in any misconduct. Economic strikers who offer to return to work after the employer has hired permanent replacement workers are not entitled to reinstatement. However, if they can't find equivalent employment elsewhere, they are entitled to be recalled as job openings become available.

6. Union members lose protection when they engage in strikes considered unlawful under the NLRA (e.g., sit-down strikes, strikes that endanger employer's property, strikes during cooling-off periods or strikes to force acceptance of featherbedding practices). The right to strike also may be limited by any agreements employees may have with the employer to submit disputes to arbitration for a specified period of time before striking.

7. In addition to strikes protected by the NLRA, many states also have enacted legislation regarding strikes, so it is imperative to refer to your own state laws as well as federal law.

HOW TO PLAY HARDBALL WITH THE UNION

Wed, 15 Oct 2025 17:12:32 GMT

1. Employers who are entering into negotiations with a union for a new contract will be compelled by the union to bargain over handling increases in wages, health, pension and other benefits. The union will give you these increases in their proposal. Generally, unions want an employer to pick up all of the increases and the employers want the employees to share in the burden of the increased costs. Employers will need to consider various bargaining strategies to obtain a favorable contract, which may include a strike or lockout with your employees.

10 STEPS TO FOLLOW TO

NEGOTIATE A FAVORABLE CONTRACT

2. Prior to selecting a bargaining strategy, an employer must identify its goals. It is important to achieve more favorable economic terms, less restrictive language or both. An employer must also determine if it has the proper person sitting at the bargaining table on its behalf to obtain the best contract from the union. It is time to introduce a new face as the company spokesman to show the union that times are changing. In the next several pages there are 10 considerations that every employer must assess before it sits down to bargain with the union.

3. Closely review the non-economic terms of the labor agreement. A review of judicial and administrative rulings will help determine if there is a need to negotiate for changes in the contract language. Contractual provisions may have been modified or even nullified by the courts or the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

4. Obtain the input of operating managers and line supervisors as to how they administer the labor agreement. Inquire about contractual provisions that hinder efficient operations. Often the best insights on the company’s bargaining position come from the front lines.

5. Schedule important deadlines. There may be adverse consequences for inaction on a number of important matters. For example, if the company is party to an agreement that was negotiated by a multi-employer bargaining group (i.e., association), the company must determine at the beginning of negotiations whether to negotiate as a part of the group or as an individual employer.

6. Assess the level of support for the union among the workforce by speaking with the line supervisors. Knowing whether employees will support a union and its proposals at the bargaining table will help assess what an employer needs to propose to reach a contract.

7. Construct a financial model that computes the specific cost components. This step is essential so negotiators can accurately report the cost associated with the company’s and the union’s proposals. This action is vital in determining the priority of any bargaining goals and objectives.

8. Anticipate bargaining issues regarding fringe benefits and alternatives. Plans should be reviewed as to coverage, usage and anticipated cost increases. Investigate the financial status of any Taft-Hartley plans to which contributions are made, as well as the amount of vested unfunded liabilities. Review the rights and obligations of the company as well as plan trustees in constructing the company’s position in the upcoming negotiations.

9A. Know your adversary. Use contacts in the “labor arena” to learn about the union and its officers. Is the local union supported by the International union? Are the current officers up for re-election in the near term? Is there strife among the officers, more than one of which may be sitting at the bargaining table? This information may help identify any intra-union pressures weighing on a union negotiator that may facilitate or hinder attempts to reach a deal.

9B. Determine if the union is negotiating other contracts in the industry at the same time because the results of those negotiations could affect the company’s negotiations.

9C. Assess the bargaining strengths and weaknesses of the union and the company.

10. Engage in contingency planning. In the event differences cannot be resolved, strike contingency planning is a vital adjunct to the issues that must be considered before bargaining begins. Contingency planning includes all aspects of ensuring that the operations continue in the event of a stoppage.

11. If your firm needs any assistance in negotiating a favorable contract or to go nonunion or any other labor relations issue, please call H. Sanford Rudnick JD of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates or any other labor issue, please call 1-800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com 24/7.

THE RUDNICK REPORT: EMPLOYER CONSIDERATIONS WHEN TERMINATING AN 8F UNION AGREEMENT

Mon, 06 Oct 2025 20:37:33 GMT

Employer Considerations When Seeking to Exit an 8(f) Agreement and Operate Non-Union

I. Background

Section 8(f) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) allows construction industry employers to enter into “pre-hire agreements” with unions. These agreements differ from Section 9(a) contracts because they do not require the union to demonstrate majority employee support before recognition. However, once a valid 8(f) agreement expires, an employer may have greater flexibility to discontinue recognition and lawfully operate as a non-union contractor—provided the employer does not convert the relationship into a Section 9(a) recognition. Also, determine if you have any Unfunded pension liability with the OE Pension.

2. Key Considerations for Transitioning to Non-Union

3.Determine Whether the Relationship Is 8(f) or 9(a):

3A.Review the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) language. If the agreement or past dealings include an express or implied recognition of majority status, the relationship may have converted into a 9(a) agreement, which limits withdrawal rights. The NLRB has recently scrutinized “conversion” language closely. A pure 8(f) agreement generally preserves the employer’s right to withdraw recognition upon expiration.

4.Timing of Withdrawal:

4A. An employer must wait until the CBA expires before refusing to bargain further. Premature withdrawal or repudiation may result in unfair labor practice charges filed by the union at the NLRB under Section 8(a)(5).

4B. Send your union a letter stating that your agreement is an 8f agreement and you are terminating the agreement after it expires. Make sure you follow the termination language in your contract so you do not miss any important timelines.

4C. Your union could file for an RC election before the termination of your contract to certify your union to continue bargaining for their contract.

5. Employee Rights and Petitions:

5A.Employees retain the right to file a decertification (RD) petition to remove the union. Employers cannot solicit or encourage employees to file such petitions but can lawfully withdraw recognition after expiration if there is no majority support demonstrated.

6.Operational Planning:

6A.Prepare to source, recruit, and train a qualified workforce outside the union hiring hall. Consider whether subcontracting and bid obligations require union labor under project labor agreements (PLAs) or customer contracts.

7. Risk of NLRB Litigation:

7A.The union may file unfair labor practice charges alleging unlawful withdrawal of recognition. Employers should ensure clear documentation that the agreement was 8(f) only, that withdrawal occurred post-expiration, and that no unlawful promises or coercion occurred with employees.

8.Communications:

8A. All communications to employees regarding the transition should be lawful, factual, and non-coercive. Employers may explain their right to operate non-union but must avoid threats, retaliation, or interference with employee choice.

9. Recommended Employer Actions

10.Legal Review: Conduct a full review of the current CBA to confirm whether it is an 8(f) or potentially converted 9(a) agreement.

11.Exit Strategy: Develop a plan for workforce needs post-agreement, including recruiting non-union employees.

12.Compliance: Wait until contract expiration before withdrawing recognition; avoid premature unilateral action.

13.Documentation: Keep detailed records supporting the 8(f) nature of the relationship.

14.Risk Management: Prepare for potential NLRB charges and union challenges.

15. Conclusion

An employer with an 8(f) agreement has options to lawfully operate non-union after the contract expires, provided that the relationship has not been converted to 9(a) status. Careful planning, timing, and legal compliance are essential to minimize risks. Also, an employer should determine if they have any unfunded pension liability.

16. If you need any assistance in terminating your 8(f)union agreement or any other labor relations, please call H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 800-326-3046, www.the unionexpert.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT: 4 factors to get an NLRB injunction

Tue, 30 Sep 2025 03:28:35 GMT

1.Supreme Court’s Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney

In Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court held

that when the NLRB

seeks a Section 10(j) injunction, courts must apply the traditional

four-factor Winter test

1.likelihood of success on the merits,

2.irreparable harm,

3.balance of equities,

4.public interest),

rejecting any special, relaxed standard for the NLRB. Wikipedia

2. If you need any assistance to get an nlrb injunction or any other labor relations, please call H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 800-326-3046, www.the unionexpert.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT: Can an Employer use its management rights clause to implement cameras without union bargaining

Tue, 23 Sep 2025 15:01:56 GMT

September 22, 2025

1.Can an Employer use its management rights clause to implement cameras into his trucks without negotiating with their union.

Issue Presented

2.Whether the collective-bargaining agreement between the employer and the union contained a clear and unmistakable (or clear and convincing) waiver permitting the employer to install cameras without bargaining, as addressed in Endurance Environmental Solutions, 372 NLRB No. 141 (2023). (EES)

Applicable Law

3.Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) imposes a duty on employers to bargain collectively with the representative of their employees concerning wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.

4.Two key doctrines inform this analysis:

A. Contract-Coverage Standard: As articulated in MV Transportation, 368 NLRB No. 66 (2019), an employer may act unilaterally if the collective-bargaining agreement’s management-rights clause or other provisions provide coverage for the specific action.

B. Waiver Standard: To demonstrate a waiver of the right to bargain, the employer bears the burden of showing clear and unmistakable evidence that the union waived its bargaining rights regarding the specific action.

Analysis

5.In Endurance Environmental Solutions (EES), the Board examined whether the employer’s management-rights clause, which included general safety language, constituted a clear and unmistakable waiver permitting installation of inward-facing cameras in trucks without bargaining.

6.The Board concluded that the clause did not meet the "clear and unmistakable standard". The clause referenced the employer’s right to implement safety measures but did not explicitly mention surveillance, cameras, or monitoring technology. Absent explicit contractual language granting the employer the unilateral right to implement such surveillance, the Board held that the union retained its bargaining rights. It is possible the Employer violated 8A5 of the Act.

7. If you need any assistance concerning implementing cameras into your trucks without bargaining with the union or any other labor relations, please call H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 800-326-3046, www.the unionexpert.com for a free case analysis 24/7

THE RUDNICK REPORT: New NLRB Legal Developments for 9-15-25: A NEW NLRB STANDARD FOR SALTIING

Wed, 17 Sep 2025 01:02:18 GMT

NLRB'S NEW LEGAL STANDARD FOR SALTING

In U.S. labor law, salting is a union-organizing tactic in which one or more union members (called salts ) apply for jobs with a non-union employer—often without disclosing their union affiliation—with the intent to organize that workforce from the inside once hired.

What GC Memo 25-08 says / changes / emphasizes

Here are the key points and changes from GC Memo 25-08:

1.Supersedes Prior Guidance

It rescinds the previous guideline memorandum (GC 08-04 (Revised) re: Toering Electric Company) and replaces it. CDF Labor Law

2.Emphasis on Toering standard

The Memo clarifies that Toering should fully govern salting cases going forward. That means Regions must evaluate both (a) whether the applicant submitted/authorized an application, and (b) whether the applicant had a genuine interest in employment, in addition to satisfying the FES requirements. CDF Labor Law+1
The GC must prove these components by a preponderance of the evidence. CDF Labor Law+1

3.Case processing / Investigation focus

Investigators (Regional Offices) are instructed to focus early on collecting evidence from the charging party (e.g. the applicant/union) rather than immediately seeking employer evidence. The logic is to determine first whether the basic Toering factors are satisfied (application + genuine interest). If not, the GC may dismiss the charge without burdening the employer. CDF Labor Law+3CDF Labor Law+3Littler Mendelson P.C.+3

In salting campaigns that submit “mass” or “batch” applications, Regions should determine whether each applicant authorized the submission of an application on their behalf. CDF Labor Law+1

4.Evidence of genuine interest

Regions should probe to see if the applicant’s behavior and application materials show a genuine interest. Instances that may weigh against genuine interest include: refusing similar employment with the employer in the past; antagonistic or offensive remarks or behavior in the application or interview; incomplete or stale applications; conduct inconsistent with the normal expectations of someone applying for a job. CDF Labor Law+1

Just stating one would have accepted a job offer isn’t sufficient alone. The GC must later (if challenged by employer) rebut evidence of insincerity. CDF Labor Law+1

5.When employer evidence is solicited

Only after the charging party’s evidence meets the Toering factors (or the issue is otherwise unclear), the Region should seek evidence from the employer. If the evidence from the charging party is lacking (e.g. no proof of application or no proof of genuine interest), the GC should consider dismissing early rather than proceeding to employer discovery. CDF Labor Law+1

6.Backpay period and remedies

The Memo directs Regions to conduct “pre-complaint backpay investigations” for meritorious cases to determine how long the salt applicant would have worked if hired. Cannot assume indefinite tenure. Factors considered include the applicant’s personal circumstances, whether union plans or instructions affect duration, historical duration of salts’ employment, etc. CDF Labor Law+1

Also, employer should be able to provide evidence that reduces or negates the backpay claim. CDF Labor Law

7.Referral to Division of Advice

Cases should be submitted to the Division of Advice when evidence from the charging party does not clearly resolve application submission / authenticity or genuine interest issues, or when there’s uncertainty whether the applicant is genuinely interested. CDF Labor Law

8. If you need any assistance concerning Salting cases or any other labor relations, please call H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 800-326-3046, www.the unionexpert.com for a free case analysis 24/7

New NLRB Updates for 9-2-25

Tue, 02 Sep 2025 20:18:38 GMT

September 2, 2025

1 . President Nominates Two Lawyers to Restore NLRB Functionality

2 . The Trump administration has submitted two nominations to the Senate— Scott Mayer (Boeing labor counsel) and James Murphy (veteran NLRB official)—to fill vacant seats and restore a Republican majority. Once confirmed, these appointments would enable the Board to regain quorum and resume adjudicating cases. A Republican-majority Board is expected to overturn some of the pro-union precedents from the Biden era

3. As of mid-February 2025, the NLRB was operating without a quorum, with only two members (Chairman Marvin Kaplan and Member David Prouty) after President Trump fired Board Chairperson Gwynne Wilcox on January 27, 2025. The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) requires three members for a quorum to issue decisions or engage in rulemaking.

4.NLRB has increased elections for 2024 and 2025

5 . The NLRB faced significant challenges in 2024 and early 2025, including a 27% increase in union elections compared to 2023, totaling 1,943 elections, often under expedited rules. Strike activity also increased, reflecting heightened labor activity.

6. If your firm needs any assistance relating to increased election activity at the NLRB or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

New NLRB Updates for 8-25-25

Tue, 26 Aug 2025 17:07:21 GMT

August 25, 2025

The following GC Memo is an important update and development at the NLRB for 8-25-25. If you have any questions about the new NLRB updates, please contact the office of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates which is as follows: www.theunionexpert.com 800-326-3036 (O)

2. Continued Lack of NLRB Quorum

The NLRB remains without the quorum required to issue decisions—due to the firing and legal battles over the reinstatement of board member Gwynne Wilcox after President Trump’s removal of her earlier in the year. The Supreme Court has issued a temporary stay on her reinstatement, keeping the board functionally paralyzed. Wikipedia+1

3. General Counsel Guidance

GC Memo 25-10 (released August 7, 2025): Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen issued revised guidance concerning when unfair labor practice (ULP) charges should be deferred to grievance and arbitration processes under collective bargaining agreements. laborrelationsupdate.com

4 . If your firm needs any assistance relating to the deferral doctrine at the NLRB or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

New Case Deveopment's at the NLRB for 8-18-25

Mon, 18 Aug 2025 02:17:47 GMT

Key NLRB Updates (as of August 18, 2025)

1. State Labor Boards Likely Preempted by Federal Authority

A senior NLRB official, Acting General Counsel William Cowen, has warned that proposals in at least three states —including New York, California, and Massachusetts—to regulate private-sector labor relations in the absence of an NLRB quorum are likely preempted by the National Labor Relations Act , which vests exclusive jurisdiction in the NLRB. The NLRB continues to operate, though without a full quorum, and judges these state efforts as likely invalid under federal law. Reuters

2. Acting GC Issues Guidance on Deferring ULP Charges to Grievance Processes (GC Memorandum 25-10)

On August 7, 2025 , the Acting General Counsel released GC Memo 25-10 , offering new guidance on when unfair labor practice (ULP) charges can be deferred to grievance and arbitration procedures rather than pursued directly before the NLRB. It clarifies use of:

Dubo deferral (if a grievance exists and the ULP can likely be resolved via the CBA grievance process), and
Collyer deferral (when no grievance has yet been filed, but deferral might still be appropriate).
Cowen emphasized the need to conserve the NLRB's limited resources during a period of staffing shortages and growing caseload. JD Supra onlabor.org

3. NLRB Sharpening Focus on “Union Salting” Tactics

On July 24, 2025 , the Acting GC issued updated guidance concerning union salting —the practice where organizers seek employment with non-union employers to facilitate organizing. The new guidance tightens scrutiny on how these cases will be handled, including evaluating whether organizers have a genuine interest in the work or are solely trying to provoke organizing. JD Supra

4. Federal Courts Advance Key Labor Law Issues Amid NLRB Quorum Void

Although the NLRB itself hasn’t issued precedential rulings in 2025 due to quorum issues, federal appellate courts have continued shaping labor law:

D.C. Circuit (Grove v. NLRB): Vacated an NLRB impasse ruling, emphasizing the need for objective evidence in impasse determinations rather than relying on a union’s denial. Labor Relations Update
Fourth Circuit (Welch): Validated vigorous union advocacy—including leafleting and litigation support—as protected activity under the NLRA. Labor Relations Update

Also of note: the Supreme Court recently declined to review a Ninth Circuit decision regarding dues checkoff, leaving lower federal court deference to NLRB interpretations reduced in the wake of Loper Bright . Labor Relations Update

5. No New Published NLRB Board Decisions This Week (Week of August 4–8, 2025)

The weekly summary for early August shows no published Board decisions , though several decisions were issued by Administrative Law Judges in various cases (e.g., Amazon, Envision Hospice, Twin City Tanning). National Labor Relations Board

6. Agency Facing Budget and Staffing Cuts—A Threat to Enforcement

Democratic lawmakers have issued warnings that recent budget cuts and office closures (in cities like Buffalo, Memphis, Los Angeles, and others) could severely impair the NLRB’s ability to enforce labor rights. These changes have been labeled “catastrophic” by critics and union representatives alike. The Guardian

7. NLRB Status Still in Quorum Limbo

The NLRB continues to function without a quorum, largely stalling any new precedential actions this year. While Acting GC Cowen remains in place, the Board’s full reconstitution depends on pending nominations and ongoing litigation over previous removals. Bloomberg Law Wikipedia

8. If your firm need any assistance relating to the above NLRB updates or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

What are the Defenses of an Employer to Overcome a Union's claim it is an Alter Ego or Successor Employer

Tue, 12 Aug 2025 21:35:34 GMT

August 11, 2025

1.The following case is a current case at the NLRB at the office of H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates which is as follows:

www.theunionexpert.com

2. To win, a alter ego case against an employer, the union must prove either alter ego status or successor employer status.

The defense goal is to show that neither applies .

3 . Defense Against Alter Ego Claim by Employer

The NLRB alter ego test generally looks for:

Substantially identical ownership
Same management
Same business purpose
Same operations
Same equipment/customers
Same supervision and employees
Plus — whether there was an anti-union motive in the restructuring.

4. Key Defense Points for Employer :

a. Different Ownership - No shared ownership or stockholders. This difference is significant under Southport Petroleum Co., 72 NLRB 1146 (1947) and its progeny.

b. Different Business Purpose & Market – That’s a different market segment, different customers, and often different bidding processes.

c. Different Operations – New company has separate offices, no use of the old company’s tools/equipment (if true), no transfer of contracts or jobs from the old company.

d. No Continuity of Workforce – Employees from the union company were not automatically hired into the new company. If any were hired, it was incidental and not wholesale.

e. No Anti-Union Motive – Closure was due to legitimate business/economic reasons, not to avoid union obligations. Scott Cook’s company was formed as a separate venture in a different market, not as a continuation.

5. Defense Against Successor/Refusal-to-Bargain Claim

The NLRB’s successor employer doctrine (from NLRB v. Burns Security Services , 406 U.S. 272 (1972)) says a new employer may have to recognize and bargain with a union if:

It continues essentially the same business operations,
Employs a majority of the predecessor’s employees, and
The bargaining unit remains appropriate.

7. If your firm need any assistance relating to the above claim that an Employer is not an alter ego or a successor Employer and that it will not negotiate with the union or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

AN EMPLOYER HAS TO GIVE A UNION NOTICE OF A SHUTDOWN THAT IT WILL NOT NEGOTIATE A NEW AGREEMENT

Mon, 04 Aug 2025 22:20:14 GMT

August 4, 2025

The following case is a current case at the NLRB at the office of H. Sanford Rudnick & Assoicates which is as follows:

www.theunionexpert.com

1. When an employer with a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) shuts down and lays off all employees, the obligation to provide notice to the union regarding non-renewal of the union contract depends on specific legal and contractual requirements. Here’s a concise analysis based on U.S. labor law, primarily under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA):

2. CBA Termination or Non-Renewal Notice :

3.Under Section 8(d) of the NLRA, employers are generally required to provide notice to the union at least 60 days before the expiration of a CBA if they intend to terminate or modify the agreement. This applies even if the employer is ceasing operations, unless the shutdown eliminates the bargaining unit entirely.

4.However, if the employer is permanently closing the business and dissolving the bargaining unit (i.e., no successors or ongoing operations), the obligation to provide notice of non-renewal may be moot, as the CBA effectively terminates with the closure. Courts and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) have held that when an employer goes out of business, the duty to bargain over the CBA’s renewal or effects may not apply if there is no ongoing employer-employee relationship.

5.Effects Bargaining :

6.Even if notice of non-renewal is not required, the employer may still have a duty to bargain with the union over the effects of the closure, such as severance, accrued benefits, or other terms impacting laid-off employees. This obligation persists unless the union waives its rights or the employer can demonstrate an economic exigency (e.g., sudden, unavoidable closure).

7.The NLRB case First National Maintenance Corp. v. NLRB (1981) clarifies that employers must bargain over the effects of a decision to close, even if the decision itself is not subject to bargaining.

8. WARN Act Considerations :

9.Under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, employers with 100 or more employees must provide 60 days’ notice of a plant closing or mass layoff to employees, their union (if applicable), and certain government entities. This is separate from CBA non-renewal notice but may overlap with union notification requirements.

10. Some CBAs include specific notice provisions for layoffs or closures, which could require additional notifications beyond federal law.

11. Contractual Provisions :

12.The CBA itself may contain clauses specifying notice requirements for termination, non-renewal, or plant closure. Even if the business shuts down, these contractual obligations may still apply unless the closure legally terminates the agreement. Reviewing the CBA’s language is critical.

13. Practical Considerations :

14.If the employer is ceasing all operations and liquidating, the union may not pursue non-renewal notice issues, as the practical impact is negligible. However, failure to provide notice could lead to unfair labor practice charges or claims for back pay or benefits if the union argues that employees were harmed.

15.If the employer is selling assets or transferring operations to a successor, the successor may inherit CBA obligations, depending on the sale structure and NLRB precedent (e.g., Burns International Security Services (1972)).

16.Conclusion : If the employer is permanently shutting down, laying off all employees, and dissolving the bargaining unit, they likely do not need to provide notice of non-renewal of the CBA, as the agreement terminates with the closure. However, they may still need to:

Bargain over the effects of the closure.
Comply with WARN Act notice requirements (if applicable).
Adhere to any specific notice provisions in the CBA.

17. If your firm need any assistance relating to the above NLRB on an Employer shut and giving the union notice that is will not negotiatiate or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

NLRB UPDATES FOR 7-28-25 WEEKLY EMAIL

joel@coaxconsulting.com (Joel Snyder) — Tue, 29 Jul 2025 00:34:24 GMT

July 28, 2025

Key Updates from the NLRB (as of July 28, 2025)

1. Via 313 Workers Certified Their Union (July 7, 2025)

Workers at Via 313’s North Campus restaurant officially won union certification under Restaurant Workers United. The NLRB dismissed employer objections related to conflicts of interest, voter influence, and allegations of misconduct. The company plans to challenge the certification while an existing unfair labor practice investigation continues. BeLabor the Point+5theunionexpert.com+5National Labor Relations Board+5

2. Fifth Circuit Rejects NLRB Order Against Apple (July 2025)

In Apple Inc. (5th Cir., July 7, 2025), the Court refused to enforce an NLRB order that found Apple violated Section 8(a)(1) by coercively interrogating a union supporter and confiscating union flyers. The court held those findings lacked substantial evidence under applicable case law. National Labor Relations Board

3. Regional Directors Struggling Amid Lack of Quorum

With only two board members following the removal of Democratic member Gwynne Wilcox, the NLRB has lacked a quorum and cannot issue binding decisions. Some employers are challenging the authority of regional directors to act unilaterally during this stalemate. Wikipedia+5OnLabor+5McKnight's Senior Living+5

4. Trump Nominates Two Republicans to Fill Vacancies (July 17–18, 2025)

President Trump nominated Scott Mayer and James Murphy to restore a Republican majority on the Board. If confirmed, they are expected to reverse many pro‑union Biden-era precedents, including policies on captive‑audience meetings and union formation procedures. theunionexpert.com+10Reuters+10JD Supra+10

5. ExxonMobil Case: Board’s 2020 Order Vacated & Reinstated

The Fifth Circuit upheld the NLRB’s decision to vacate a prior 2020 order due to conflict of interest by a Board member. The court affirmed that Exxon unlawfully refused to bargain in good faith and retaliated against a union, rejecting Exxon’s petition. National Labor Relations Board+2Justia Law+2National Labor Relations Board+2

6 Underlying Trends & Legal Implications

A. Board paralysis : Since the firing of Gwynne Wilcox in January 2025, the NLRB has lacked a quorum—halting many decisions and complaint resolutions. Execution now heavily relies on regional directors and pending Senate confirmations. JD Supra+5Wikipedia+5Reuters+5

B. Potential shift in precedent : If Mayer and Murphy are confirmed, expect a return to earlier, management‑friendly labor board policies, including re-interpretation of Section 7 rights and permissible employer speech. BeLabor the Point+4JD Supra+4Bloomberg Law+4

C. Supreme Court influence : A May 2025 ruling allowing removal of independent agency members (including NLRB board members) is likely to shape future governance norms. theunionexpert.com+3The Wall Street Journal+3Reuters+3

8.Quick Takeaway

As of July 28, 2025 , the NLRB is in a state of operational limbo. A lack of quorum has prevented the board from issuing new binding decisions, while key appellate courts have issued notable rulings affecting labor law enforcement. The pending Senate confirmation of two board nominees could pivot the agency from its recent pro‑union direction back toward management-aligned policies.

9. If your firm need any assistance relating to the above NLRB cases or any other labor relations issues please contact, Sanford Rudnick JD at 1-800-326-3046 or www.theunionexpert.com

An Employer does not have to bargain with a union when Employer Files Objections, etc. to the election

joel@coaxconsulting.com (Joel Snyder) — Tue, 22 Jul 2025 00:45:04 GMT

July 21, 2025

1. When an employer loses an election and files objections or exceptions to the NLRB etc., the employer does not have to bargain with the union until the NLRB issues the certification of the election.

2. When an employer loses an election and files objections or exceptions to the NLRB, the employer does not have to bargain with a union until the NLRB issues its certification of the election. Thus, if a union requests to bargain during the objection period or certification period an Employer does not have to bargain with the Union.

3.When an employer files timely objections or exceptions to the conduct of an election or to the Regional Director’s decision, the certification of the union is withheld until the NLRB in Washington, D.C. rules on those objections.

4.Until the union is certified by the NLRB, the employer has no legal duty to bargain under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

5.If the NLRB overrules the objections and certifies the union, then the employer is legally required to begin bargaining in good faith.

6.If the NLRB sustains the objections, the results of the election may be set aside, and a new election could be ordered.

7. Supporting Authority:

A.NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575 (1969): clarified that the duty to bargain arises only after certification unless exceptional circumstances apply.

B.NLRB Case Handling Manual, Part Two: explains that certification is withheld during the pendency of exceptions to the election.

C. See 29 C.F.R. § 102.69 – procedural rule outlining timelines and procedures for objections and certification.

8.If your Company needs help with understanding the appeal process at the NLRB or any other labor relations need, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

NEW CASE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE NLRB ON JULY 14, 2025

joel@coaxconsulting.com (Joel Snyder) — Tue, 15 Jul 2025 14:14:42 GMT

July 14, 2025

Here are the most recent, relevant NLRB developments as of July 14, 2025 :

1. Via 313 Union Certified (July 7, 2025)

Workers at Via 313’s North Campus restaurant officially won union certification, with Restaurant Workers United recognized as their exclusive bargaining representative. The NLRB dismissed employer objections related to alleged conflicts of interest, voter influence, and workplace misconduct. The employer indicated it may seek review and contested the certification in parallel with ongoing investigation into unfair labor practice charges, which the Board has resumed employerlaborrelations.com+15Eater Austin+15National Labor Relations Board+15 .

2. Acting NLRB General Counsel Warns Against Secret Recordings (June 25, 2025)

Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen’s GC Memo 25‑07 states that secretly recording collective bargaining sessions —whether by employers or unions— violates the NLRA , as it undermines mutual trust. Though non-binding until formally adopted, regional offices have received clear instructions to enforce this directive Labor Relations Update .

3. FY 2026 Budget Proposal Cuts and Modernization (May 23, 2025)

The NLRB proposed a $285.2 million FY 2026 budget— 4.7% below FY 2025 —while cutting 99 full-time positions. However, the plan includes a $23 million boost for IT upgrades, cybersecurity, and leveraging AI to reduce regional backlog in case processing Labor Relations Update .

4. Fifth Circuit Rebukes Apple Ruling (early July 2025)

The Fifth Circuit overturned an NLRB finding that Apple had unlawfully interrogated employees and removed union flyers, citing lack of substantial evidence. This decision narrows the Board’s enforcement powers and highlights the influence appellate courts hold over its findings BeLabor the Point+15Bloomberg Law+15en.wikipedia.org+15 .

5. Board Still Lacks Quorum and Faces Leadership Turmoil

The resignation of Board member Gwynne Wilcox by executive order has left the NLRB without the legally required quorum (three sitting members), which has paused major decision-making OnLabor+3employerlaborrelations.com+3en.wikipedia.org+3 .
Although a district judge ordered her reinstatement on March 6, 2025, the Supreme Court temporarily stayed that reinstatement. The legal dispute continues in court OnLabor+2managementmemo.com+2en.wikipedia.org+2 .

6. If your Company needs help with understanding the new developments at the NLRB or any other labor relations need, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

An Explanation of the Right to Strike by a Union

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 07 Jul 2025 20:47:51 GMT

1 Section 7 of the National Labor Relation Act states in part, “Employees shall have the right. . . to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.” Strikes are included among the concerted activities protected for employees by this section. Section 13 also concerns the right to strike. It reads as follows:

2 Lawful and unlawful strikes . The lawfulness of a strike may depend on the object, or purpose, of the strike, on its timing, or on the conduct of the strikers. The object, or objects, of a strike and whether the objects are lawful are matters that are not always easy to determine. Such issues often have to be decided by the National Labor Relations Board. The consequences can be severe to striking employees and struck employers, involving as they do questions of reinstatement and backpay.

3 Strikes for a lawful object .Employees who strike for a lawful object fall into two classes “economic strikers” and “unfair labor practice strikers.” Both classes continue as employees, but unfair labor practice strikers have greater rights of reinstatement to their jobs.

4 Economic strikers defined . If the object of a strike is to obtain from the employer some economic concession such as higher wages, shorter hours, or better working conditions, the striking employees are called economic strikers. They retain their status as employees and cannot be discharged, but they can be replaced by their employer. If the employer has hired bona fide permanent replacements who are filling the jobs of the economic strikers when the strikers apply unconditionally to go back to work, the strikers are not entitled to reinstatement at that time. However, if the strikers do not obtain regular and substantially equivalent employment, they are entitled to be recalled to jobs for which they are qualified when openings in such jobs occur if they, or their bargaining representative, have made an unconditional request for their reinstatement.

5 Unfair labor practice strikers defined .Employees who strike to protest an unfair labor practice committed by their employer are called unfair labor practice strikers. Such strikers can be neither discharged nor permanently replaced. When the strike ends, unfair labor practice strikers, absent serious misconduct on their part, are entitled to have their jobs back even if employees hired to do their work have to be discharged.

6 If the Board finds that economic strikers or unfair labor practice strikers who have made an unconditional request for reinstatement have been unlawfully denied reinstatement by their employer, the Board may award such strikers backpay starting at the time they should have been reinstated.

7 Strikes unlawful because of purpose

Section 8(b)(4) of the Act prohibits strikes for certain objects even though the objects are not necessarily unlawful if achieved by other means. An example of this would be a strike to compel Employer A to cease doing business with Employer B. It is not unlawful for Employer A voluntarily to stop doing business with Employer B, nor is it unlawful for a union merely to request that it do so. It is, however, unlawful for the union to strike with an object of forcing the employer to do so. These points will be covered in more detail in the explanation of Section 8(b)(4). In any event, employees who participate in an unlawful strike may be discharged and are not entitled to reinstatement.

8 Strikes unlawful because of timing —Effect of no-strike contract. A strike that violates a no-strike provision of a contract is not protected by the Act, and the striking employees can be discharged or otherwise disciplined, unless the strike is called to protest certain kinds of unfair labor practices committed by the employer. It should be noted that not all refusals to work are considered strikes and thus violations of no-strike provisions. A walkout because of conditions abnormally dangerous to health, such as a defective ventilation system in a spray-painting shop, has been held not to violate a no-strike provision.

9 Strikes at end of contract period .Section 8(d) provides that when either party desires to terminate or change an existing contract, it must comply with certain conditions. If these requirements are not met, a strike to terminate or change a contract is unlawful and participating strikers lose their status as employees of the employer engaged in the labor dispute. If the strike was caused by the unfair labor practice of the employer, however, the strikers are classified as unfair labor practice strikers and their status is not affected by failure to follow the required procedure.

10 Strikes unlawful because of misconduct of strikers . Strikers who engage in serious misconduct in the course of a strike may be refused reinstatement to their former jobs. This applies to both economic strikers and unfair labor practice strikers. Serious misconduct has been held to include, among other things, violence and threats of violence. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a “sitdown” strike, when employees simply stay in the plant and refuse to work, thus depriving the owner of property, is not protected by the law. Examples of serious misconduct that could cause the employees involved to lose their right to reinstatement are:

Strikers physically blocking persons from entering or leaving a struck plant.
Strikers threatening violence against nonstriking employees.
Strikers attacking management representatives.

11 Section 8(g)—Striking or Picketing a Health Care Institution Without Notice. Section 8(g) prohibits a labor organization from engaging in a strike, picketing, or other concerted refusal to work at any health care institution without first giving at least 10 days’ notice in writing to the institution and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service.

What is the effect for an Employer who is a new purchaser of a company with a union contract in asset purchase or stock purchase

Tue, 24 Jun 2025 13:57:54 GMT

Weekly emails that you receive are current cases at the NLRB that H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates, a Labor Relations Firm, are working on at the NLRB throughout the US.

1 .If an employer has a union contract without a successorship clause , whether a new purchaser must honor the union contract depends on the nature of the sale and what happens afterward. Here's a breakdown based on U.S. labor law under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and relevant case law:

2. A. Asset Sale (Only the Assets Are Purchased)

3.General Rule : In an asset sale , the buyer is NOT automatically bound by the seller’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

4.However, under successorship doctrine (see NLRB v. Burns International Security Services , 406 U.S. 272 (1972)), if the buyer:

5.Retains a majority of the predecessor’s workforce, and

6. Continues a substantially similar business ,then the buyer is a "successor employer" and must recognize and bargain with the union—but does not have to adopt the existing contract .

7. Key Point : The buyer must not explicitly or implicitly agree to assume the union contract unless they want to.

8. B. Stock Sale (Ownership of Company Changes, Not the Entity Itself)

9. In a stock sale , the legal entity remains the same , only the ownership changes.

10. The existing CBA and union relationship remain in effect because the employer is still the same legal entity .

11. So, the buyer cannot avoid the union contract by purchasing the business through a stock transaction.

12. If an Employer has any issues regarding the purchase of a company with a union contract , or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326

3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

Employers can install Cameras into their trucks without bargaining with their union by using there "Management Rights Clause"

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 11 Jun 2025 02:41:19 GMT

1.Weekly emails that you receive are current cases at the NLRB that H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates, a Labor Relations Firm, are working on at the NLRB throughout the US.

2. In 2024, the IBEW union throughout the country are now filing meritless NLRB charges against Employers for bargaining in bad faith for installing dash cam cameras into their trucks without bargaining with the union. The IBEW states that they have the right to bargain with an Employer even when they have an existing contract with the Employer but the contract is silent on the installation of cameras into their trucks.

3. The Employer's have a management rights clause that allows Employers to any actions on a unilateral basis without bargaining with the union that relate to safety of their equipment and their employees to reduce accidents.

4.Employers are contending the union waived its right to bargain over the implementation of the Cameras since their Management Rights Clause allowed the Employers to do it.

5.In Endurance Environmental Solutions, 373 NLRB No. 141(2024), the NLRB reversed the “contract coverage” standard by MV Transportation and reinstated the “clear and unmistakable waiver standard to determine if the union waived its right to bargain with an employer concerning the installation of cameras into their trucks.

6.This change requires Employers to demonstrate that a union has explicitly waived its right to bargain over specific changes to the terms and conditions to a section of an agreement. The Board emphasized that vague or broad management rights clauses are insufficient to justify unilateral changes without bargaining.

7.Employers are contending that its management rights clause does specify that an Employer's can take unilateral actions without bargaining with the union that are related to safety, that is, installing dash cam cameras into their trucks not for surveillance of its employees. Installation of cameras into their trucks reduces employee accidents substantially.

8. Pursuant to the case, Stern Produce vs NLRB No. 23, 1100, DC Cir. 2024, an employer was allowed to install cameras into its trucks for safety purposes for the employees and not for surveillance and monitoring of its employees.

9. Thus, Employers can implement dash cam cameras into their trucks by using their Management Rights Clause without bargaining with the union if the clause relates safety of its employees and trucks.

10. If an Employer has any issues regarding not bargaining with a union over the installation of cameras into their trucks or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326 3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

A Non Board NLRB Settlement can Eliminate years of Litigation for a Union and an Employer at the NLRB

Mon, 02 Jun 2025 23:09:05 GMT

1.Emails that you receive are current cases at the NLRB that H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are working on at the NLRB throughout the US.

2. The Pipefitters 669 union filed several unfair labor practices charges at the NLRB against an Employer for 8(1) and 8(3) violations of the NLRB Act alleging the Employer terminated several employees for union activities and making many antiunion statements against the Union. The Employer laid off several employees for legitimate business reasons pursuant to Wright line. Also, the Employer did not make these antiunion statements.

3. The Employer submitted affidavits and his statement of position to the NLRB. Rather than waiting for the NLRB to make a decision, which could be months since it does not have a general counsel, it decided it would enter a non board settlement with the union.

4. The non board settlement with the Pipefitters Union took several weeks but the Employer agree to pay back some backpay to the employees and posted a notice for 60 days that the Employer would not make these alleged antiunion statements in the future.

5. The non board settlement by the Employer and the union saved them thousands of dollars in litigation costs and years of litigation if the NLRB issued a complaint. Also, it shows that the Employer and the Union can cooperate together to resolve labor issues.

6. If an Employer has any issues regarding a non board settlement at the NLRB, or any other labor relations issues at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326 3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

The UFCW and the Teamster's Unions are organizing Employers in the Cannabis Industry

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Thu, 29 May 2025 09:26:26 GMT

1.Emails that you receive are current cases at the NLRB that H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are working on at the NLRB throughout the US.

2.Now it is legal for recreational use in 24 states, the cannabis industry has become a major economic force in the United States, employing over 400,000 people. While cannabis is still unlawful under federal law , state-level legalization has made cannabis less of a black market, as run-of-the-mill health codes, employment laws, and other regulations now apply to cannabis businesses.

3.So does the National Labor Relations Act. While some cannabis workers (i.e. those who grow and harvest the plant) are agricultural employees outside the NLRA’s purview, many others who work in dispensaries and processing facilities are subject to federal labor law, as Michelle outlined here . In recent years, unions including the United Food and Commercial Workers and the Teamsters have organized cannabis workers, now representing tens of thousands of them.

Understanding Labor Peace Requirements

4.But states have also passed their own laws impacting labor relations in the cannabis industry. California law requires any cannabis business with 10 or more employees to enter into a “labor peace agreement” with a “bona fide labor organization,” i.e. a union. Several other states also encourage the agreements in some form in the cannabis industry. A labor peace agreement is a contract between an employer and a union in which the union agrees not to disrupt the employer’s operations, typically by refraining from any strikes, pickets, boycotts, or other campaigns.

5.On their face, labor peace agreements may appear to hinder unions, because the unions surrender their most powerful forms of collective action. But in practice, employers must offer unions significant concessions in order to get the unions to sign these agreements, often granting the unions the right to organize the employers’ workforces on favorable terms such as card check.

6. Accordingly, as the Ninth Circuit has observed , unions often advocate for states and cities to require labor peace agreements in certain sectors. Because these agreements transform the playing field for union organizing, states and cities typically craft labor peace requirements to fall within the market participant exception to federal labor preemption (the contours of which I have analyzed here ), applying them to government-backed or government-owned ventures like airports and infrastructure projects.

7.If an Employer has any issues regarding a union in the cannabis Industry or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326 3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

An Oral Agreement in Writing Can Modify the Finding of an Audit of a Trust Fund

marketing@coaxconsulting.com (Jack Barcena) — Mon, 19 May 2025 23:35:33 GMT

1.Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB or audits by Trust Funds.

2.A Trust Fund audited an Employer for health and welfare payments.

3.The Trust Fund stated the Employer owed over $100,000.

4.The Employer stated there was an oral agreement between the Union and the Employer and that the Employer did not need to make benefit payments.

5.According to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Kroger Co., 226 F.3d 903 (7th Cir. 2000) the court held:

In this case, the employer argued that the union orally agreed that certain contributions were not required. The court considered the issue of whether an oral agreement could override the written terms of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The court held that while oral agreements might be considered in some contexts, they cannot modify the explicit terms of a CBA unless there is a clear and mutual understanding between the parties.

6.Since the employer and the union had a specific in writing concerning the oral agreement, the trust fund allowed the audit to be modified to reflect the oral Agreement.

7. If your Company is going through an Trust Audit and needs some defenses to the audit, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

WHEN IS IT LEGAL FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, ICE or HLS, TO ARREST AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT

Wed, 14 May 2025 17:54:08 GMT

1.When is legal for the Federal Government by ICE or HLS to Arrest an illegal immigrant.

2.INTRODUCTION

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), lawfully apprehended the Respondent, an undocumented alien present in the United States without lawful status, based on probable cause that Respondent posed a threat to public safety and was removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The Respondent has a documented history of criminal activity, including [e.g., felony conviction, gang affiliation, or violent conduct], making the arrest not only lawful but necessary to protect the community.

3.ARGUMENT

4. ICE Possesses Statutory Authority to Arrest Removable Aliens

4(A) Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2), ICE officers are authorized to:

"...arrest any alien in the United States if the officer has reason to believe that the alien is in the United States in violation of any law or regulation and is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained for his arrest."

The Respondent, an undocumented immigrant, is inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) and removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(B). These provisions clearly grant ICE the authority to detain and initiate removal proceedings.

4(B). The Arrest Was Based on Probable Cause and Respondent’s Criminal Conduct

Probable cause existed for the arrest, based on:

- Information that the Respondent lacked valid immigration documentation;

- A prior [e.g., felony conviction for assault, DUI, drug trafficking];

- Verified information from local law enforcement or a national database (NCIC, IDENT, etc.);

- Evidence of gang or cartel affiliation (if applicable).

In United States v. Olivares-Rangel, 458 F.3d 1104 (10th Cir. 2006), the court held that immigration arrests are lawful if supported by probable cause and executed under statutory authority. Here, ICE acted fully within legal limits.

4 (C). There Was No Constitutional Violation

ICE officers conducted the arrest in accordance with Fourth Amendment standards, including:

- No unreasonable search or seizure;

- No use of excessive force;

- Arrest conducted in a public place or pursuant to valid administrative warrant.

Under INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984), civil immigration enforcement actions do not trigger the same exclusionary rule protections as criminal proceedings unless there is egregious conduct—which is not alleged or evidenced here. 11

4 (D). Public Safety Justifies Detention Pending Proceedings

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c), ICE is required to detain certain categories of aliens, including those convicted of crimes involving moral turpitude, controlled substances, or crimes of violence. The Respondent falls within these categories.

Given the Respondent’s background, their continued presence in the community poses an unacceptable risk, justifying detention without bond pending resolution of removal proceedings.

5.CONCLUSION

The arrest and detention of the Respondent were entirely lawful under federal immigration law and constitutional principles. ICE officers acted within their legal authority and in the interest of public safety.

6.If an Employer has any issues regarding the arrest of one of your employees since they were an illegal immigrant which might violate the NLRB Act as well, or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326-3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

An Employer can terminate an employee for taking PTO without the consent of the Employer

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 06 May 2025 15:32:03 GMT

1. An Employer can Install Cameras into their Trucks Without bargaining with the Union.

2. If a union that does not have any language in their contract about installation of cameras, it allows an Employer to install cameras into their trucks for safety purposes pursuant to its management rights clause.

3. The Employer cannot install cameras for union surveillance or monitoring of the employees which is a violation of the NLRB Act.

4. The installation of the cameras must be for strictly safety purposes.

5. Clear and Unmistakable Waiver:

Employers need to ensure any waivers of bargaining rights related to camera installation are explicit and unambiguous.

6. If an Employer has any issues installing cameras into their trucks without bargaining with the union or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-326-3046 sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

Can An Employer Require an Employee to Take a Covid Test.

Thu, 17 Apr 2025 21:46:24 GMT

In the U.S., employers can generally require employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19, but there are important exceptions and limitations:

1. Medical and Religious Exemptions – Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, employees may request exemptions for medical reasons or sincerely held religious beliefs. Employers must provide reasonable accommodations unless it creates an undue hardship.

2. State and Local Laws – Some states have passed laws that limit or prohibit employer vaccine mandates, especially for private employers.

3. Union and Employment Contracts – If an employee is covered by a union agreement or employment contract, the terms of that agreement may impact whether a vaccine mandate is enforceable.

4. At-Will Employment – In most states, employment is "at-will," meaning an employer can terminate employees who refuse a vaccine (except where exemptions apply).

5. Industry-Specific Rules – Healthcare facilities and government contractors may have different rules due to federal regulations.

6.If an Employer has any issues with requiring employees to get covid tests or any other labor relations issue at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD At 1-800-323046, sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates can win you case at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) or help you to Negotiate a Favorable Agreement.

Thu, 17 Apr 2025 21:45:16 GMT

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

Can a Whistle Blower/Employee get relief at the National Labor Relations Board

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:32:49 GMT

March 24, 2025

1. As you know every week, H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates tells Employers what the NLRB had ruled with my firms current cases.

2. This week I wanted to explain when a Whistleblower/employee files a complaint at the NLRB.

3. A Whistleblower is someone who reports illegal, unethical, or improper activities within an organization. This could include fraud, corruption, safety violations, or other misconduct. Whistleblowers can be employees, contractors, or even outsiders who have knowledge of wrongdoing.

4. Depending on the situation, whistleblowers may report to authorities such as government agencies, regulators, or the media. In many countries, there are laws that protect whistleblowers from retaliation, such as being fired or harassed for speaking out.

5. A whistleblower who was terminated for reporting labor law violations to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) may be entitled to remedies under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) . The NLRB protects employees from retaliation for engaging in protected concerted activity , including whistleblowing on unfair labor practices.

6. Potential Remedies for a Wrongfully Terminated Whistleblower:

Reinstatement – The employee may be reinstated to their former position if the NLRB determines the termination was unlawful.
Back Pay – Compensation for lost wages and benefits due to wrongful termination.
Front Pay – If reinstatement isn’t feasible, the employee may receive compensation for future lost earnings.
Expungement of Disciplinary Records – Any references to the wrongful termination may be removed from the employee's record.
Cease and Desist Orders – The employer may be ordered to stop retaliatory practices.
Notice Posting – The employer might be required to post a notice informing employees of their rights and the violation committed.
Other Make-Whole Relief – This could include damages for harm suffered due to the retaliation.

8. If an Employer has any problems with a Whistleblower /employee in general or any other labor relations issue, please contact Sanford Rudnick JD

At 1-800-326-3046, sandy@rudnickpro.com or www.Theunionexpert.com

An Employer that is not at Impasse in Negotiations cannot implement new terms and conditions

Tue, 11 Mar 2025 18:31:28 GMT

March 10, 2025

Hood River Distillers v. NLRB (DC Cir 03/07/2025)

http://case.lawmemo.com/dc/hood.pdf

1.The Court of Appeals enforced an NLRB order that held that the employer had unilaterally changed employment terms even though there was no impasse in negotiations.

2.During lengthy negotiations, the employer several times said they were at impasse, yet bargaining continued.

3.In the end, the employer recognized that the parties had made headway and said it had more room to give. Thus, the employer was not at impasse to implement the new terms and conditions.

4.If you need assistance in negotiations when you can implement your final proposal and you are at impasse, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 04 Mar 2025 03:19:41 GMT

LIFE VISION

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

Conflict Resolution Specialists and Labor Consultants Presents:

LIFE IS PEACE

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING

THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

Life is Peace 5 step formula will help resolve any conflict in the world.

Every person, business, state, and nation must have the formula to resolve conflict, prevent adverse consequences and violence.

“It is with the book “Life is Peace”.

Did you know?

The book “Life is Peace” can be found in libraries and museums around the world

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

The formula in the book LIFE IS PEACE can resolve any conflict. Each letter in the word PEACE stands for a specific

principle:

P stands for Process.
E stands for Explanation of Positions
A stands for Acceptance of the Process
C stands for Compromise.
E stands for containment of Emotions.

The Air Force, Marines, West Point, and many libraries, museums, and religious institutions around the world have this

book on how to Resolve Conflict. Please go to www.4lifevision.com and visit our reference page to see the hundreds of

references from libraries, museums, and religious institutions.

Download the book at https://www.4lifevision.com/ or call 1-800-326-3046 for a copy. Also, there are private sessions available

for individuals, businesses, schools, and seminars available for any conflict resolution. For Conflict Resolution Coaching

call H. Sanford Rudnick at 1-800-326-3046.

Receive a green wrist band with the word PEACE on the band as a gift with Life is Peace book purchase.

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

1990 No. California Blvd. S 830

Walnut Creek, Ca. 94596

1-800-326-3046

HOW CAN AN EMPLOYER RESOLVE HIS UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY WITH HIS UNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 26 Feb 2025 01:52:01 GMT

February 25, 2025

How to Resolve an Employer’s Unfunded Pension Liability (UPL)

1 If an Employer has a union contract and either sells, goes out of business, or retires, it might have an unexpected unfunded pension liability (UPL) if they have a union defined benefit pension plan.

2. An Employer should write a letter to the Union pension plan a least one year in advance to determine if they have an UPL before they discontinue their Business.

3. If the Employer does have an UPL to the Pension Trust, it is best to resolve the UPL with a written settlement. There are many circumstances where an Employer MAY not have to pay his UPL.

4. The pension trust and Employer can enter into a settlement to reduce their UPL where the Employer can remit a lump sum payment to the Trust Fund for a reduced amount.

5. If the Employer cannot enter into a settlement to resolve their UPL then the parties can enter into a 20 Year Agreement to pay off their UPL.

6. If your company needs assistance in reducing your unfunded pension liability with your union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

CAN AN EMPLOYER REQUEST THE NLRB TO DISMISS AN ELECTION PETITION IF AN EMPLOYER IS CEASES HIS BUSINESS OPERATIONS WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER PETITION IS FILED?

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 18 Feb 2025 21:54:33 GMT

February 18, 2025

When an employer decides to cease operations shortly after a union election petition is filed, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) scrutinizes the employer's motives to determine if the action was intended to interfere with employees' organizing rights. The employer bears the burden of providing substantial and credible evidence that the decision to cease operations was based on legitimate business reasons unrelated to union activities.

Required Evidence

A. To meet this burden, the employer must present concrete evidence, which may include:

Documented Financial Records : Demonstrating economic hardships, declining sales, or other financial metrics that necessitate cessation of operations.
Strategic Business Plans : Showing that the decision aligns with long-term business strategies, such as restructuring or focusing on other markets, formulated prior to any union activity.
Communications and Timelines : Providing records of internal communications and decision-making timelines that corroborate the employer's rationale for ceasing operations, established independently of the union election petition.
Evidence of Imminent Cessation : The employer must demonstrate that plans to cease operations were imminent and not a reaction to the union election petition. This includes announcements of business closure to the public and employees, termination notices, or other definitive actions indicating a predetermined decision to cease operations.

B. If your company needs assistance trying to get a union petition dismissed 30 days after the election petition is filed since you are going out of business, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

HOW TO RESOLVE AN EMPLOYER'S UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY (UPL)

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 11 Feb 2025 13:22:54 GMT

February 10, 2025

How to Resolve an Employer’s Unfunded Pension Liability (UPL)

2. An Employer should write a letter to the Union pension plan a least one year in advance to determine if they have an UPL before they discontinue their Business.

3. If the Employer does have an UPL to the Pension Trust, it is best to resolve the UPL with a written settlement. There are many circumstances where an Employer MAY not have to pay his UPL.

4. The pension trust and Employer can enter into a settlement to reduce their UPL where the Employer can remit a lump sum payment to the Trust Fund for a reduced amount.

5. If the Employer cannot enter into a settlement to resolve their UPL then the parties can enter into a 20 Year Agreement to pay off their UPL.

6. If your company needs assistance in reducing your unfunded pension liability with your union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Learn More

How much Notice does a Union have to Give before they Strike.

Tue, 04 Feb 2025 22:52:24 GMT

February 3, 2025

1. According to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), a union generally does NOT have a specific, mandatory notice period they must give to a private employer before going on strike, with the exception of healthcare institutions where at least10 days' written notice is required under Section 8(g) of the NLRA; meaning most private sector unions can strike without giving prior notice to the Employer.

2. However, if there is a strike between a union and an Employer, an Employer must prepare for the strike so the Employer can keep operating.

3. H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates has a checklist of 30

Steps an Employer must take to be prepared for a strike.

4. If your company needs assistance in negotiations or a strike with your union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

ELECTION CAMPAIGNING WITH A VIDEO AND A WEBSITE ABOUT THE IBEW UNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 27 Jan 2025 21:55:23 GMT

January 27, 2025

1. With the recent changes in NLRB Board law that restricts Employers from having unrestricted meetings or contact with your employees, using a union Video and a Website might be helpful in educating your employee about your Union in an election campaign. Attached is a video about the IBEW Union.

2. Click here for the PREVIEW VERSION of “The Real Story of the IBEW UNION (Illustration Version) Video” 2023

Attached is a preview video that Employers might use to educate your employees and Supervisors about the IBEW or any union with modifications to fit your current union concerning a union election. You can use the preview video to show your Employees or Supervisors about whether they should vote Yes for a Union or No against the Union.

3. Also, if an Employer has too many employees to hold meetings you can use a website to educate your employees about your union. You can see an example of a website my firm did against the Communications Workers of America at www.cwaelections.com

4. Ultimately, the decision to educate your employees about a union with a video or a website depends on the employer’s evaluation of their needs and priorities. It is critical for employers to review all available information and the types of campaigning you might want to use.

5. If your company needs assistance in an NLRB election with educating your employees with a custom video or a website, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Election campaigning with a Video and a Website about the Unite Here Union

Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:10:35 GMT

January 20, 2025

2. Click here for the PREVIEW VERSION of “The Real Story of Unite Here Union” 2025

Attached is a preview video that Employers might use to educate your employees and Supervisors about the Unite Here or any union with modifications to fit your current union concerning a union election. You can use the preview video to show your Employees or Supervisors about whether they should vote Yes for a Union or No against the Union.

5. If your company needs assistance in an NLRB election with educating your employees with a custom video or a website, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Election campaigning with a Video and a Website

Tue, 07 Jan 2025 01:42:31 GMT

January 6, 2025

2. CLICK HERE for PREVIEW VERSION of "The Real Story of the Teamsters Union "2024

Attached is a preview video that Employers might use to educate your employees and Supervisors about the Teamsters or any union with modifications to fit your current union.You can use the preview video to show your Employees or Supervisors about whether they should vote Yes for a Union or No against the Union.

5. If your company needs assistance in an NLRB election with educating your employees with a custom video or a website, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Sat, 28 Dec 2024 01:57:13 GMT

LIFE VISION

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

Conflict Resolution Specialists and Labor Consultants Presents:

LIFE IS PEACE

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING

THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

Life is Peace 5 step formula will help resolve any conflict in the world.

Every person, business, state, and nation must have the formula to resolve conflict, prevent adverse consequences and violence.

“It is with the book “Life is Peace”.

Did you know?

The book “Life is Peace” can be found in libraries and museums around the world

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

The formula in the book LIFE IS PEACE can resolve any conflict. Each letter in the word PEACE stands for a specific

principle:

P stands for Process.
E stands for Explanation of Positions
A stands for Acceptance of the Process
C stands for Compromise.
E stands for containment of Emotions.

The Air Force, Marines, West Point, and many libraries, museums, and religious institutions around the world have this

book on how to Resolve Conflict. Please go to www.4lifevision.com and visit our reference page to see the hundreds of

references from libraries, museums, and religious institutions.

Download the book at https://www.4lifevision.com/ or call 1-800-326-3046 for a copy. Also, there are private sessions available

for individuals, businesses, schools, and seminars available for any conflict resolution. For Conflict Resolution Coaching

call H. Sanford Rudnick at 1-800-326-3046.

Receive a green wrist band with the word PEACE on the band as a gift with Life is Peace book purchase.

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

1990 No. California Blvd. S 830

Walnut Creek, Ca. 94596

1-800-326-3046

Six Reasons for Employees to Vote Against a Union in an NLRB Election.

Mon, 16 Dec 2024 20:16:02 GMT

December 16, 2024

When deciding whether to vote for or against union representation, in an NLRB election, Employers should tell it’s employees that they should consider the following considerations. Here are six (6) reasons that might lead employees to vote against the union:

1.Possible Concerns About Dues : Unions like to charge membership dues. Employees might believe the cost outweighs the benefits if they are satisfied with their current compensation and working conditions. For example, at the end of negotiations, employees might not get an increase in wages or benefits to cover the cost of the union dues.

2.Possible Potential for Corruption : Reports of corruption or mismanagement within unions, such as past issues involving some locals, may make employees skeptical about whether the union will act in their best interests.

3. Satisfaction with Current Management : If employees feel that their employer already offers fair wages, benefits, and workplace policies, they may not see a need for union representation.

4. Possible Fear of Strained Relationships: Some employees might worry that unionization could lead to an adversarial relationship between workers and management, potentially impacting collaboration and workplace harmony.

5. Possible Lack of Transparency or Effectiveness: Employees may question the union's ability to deliver meaningful improvements, particularly if the union’s track record is unclear or unimpressive.

6. Possible loss of Individual Negotiation: Some workers prefer to negotiate directly with their employer rather than through a collective bargaining process that might not reflect individual priorities.

Ultimately, the decision to vote for or against union representation depends on employees' evaluation of whether the union aligns with their needs and priorities. It is critical for employees to review all available information and attend voluntary informational meetings before casting their votes.

8. If your company needs assistance in an NLRB election with your employees, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CAN HOLD MEETINGS WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES IN AN ELECTION AS LONG AS THE MEETINGS ARE VOLUNTARY

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 09 Dec 2024 21:17:53 GMT

December 9, 2024

1.Today, the Board issued a decision in Amazon.com Services LLC, ruling that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act by requiring employees under threat of discipline or discharge to attend meetings in which the employer expresses its views on unionization.

2.Overruling Babcock & Wilcox Co., 77 NLRB 577 (1948), the Board explained that such meetings—commonly known as captive-audience meetings—violate Section 8(a)(1) of the Act because they have a reasonable tendency to interfere with and coerce employees in the exercise of their Section 7 rights.

3.However, the Board made clear that an employer may lawfully hold meetings with workers to express its views on unionization so long as workers are provided reasonable advance notice of: the subject of any such meeting, that attendance is voluntary with no adverse consequences for failure to attend, and that no attendance records of the meeting will be kept.

4.If your company needs assistance in an election to hold meetings with your employees with your union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

An Employer cannot Threaten or Discharge an Employee during a Strike.

Tue, 03 Dec 2024 20:08:38 GMT

1 . Hiran Management, Inc. d/b/a Hungry Like the Wolf ( 16-CA-303914; 373 NLRB No. 130 ) Houston, TX, November 4, 2024.

2. The NLRB stated that an Employer violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by threatening employees with discharge and other unspecified reprisals, and by discharging employees, because they engaged in a protected walkout and strike.

3.If your company needs assistance in collective bargaining and a possible strike with your union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CAN CONTINUE WITH THEIR ELECTION CAMPAIGN AFTER MAIL BALLOTS ARE SENT OUT TO THEIR EMPLOYEES

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 25 Nov 2024 21:16:32 GMT

November 25, 2024

A. During an NLRB mail-ballot election, once the ballots are sent out to employees, employers are still allowed to campaign within legal limits. However, the timing and method of communication must comply with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Here's what employers can do:

B. Permitted Activities:

1. Continue Sharing Information:

Employers can provide factual information about the election process and the implications of unionization.
They can remind employees of the employer's position on union representation in a non-coercive way.

2. Hold Meetings:

Employers can hold voluntary or mandatory meetings to discuss the union election, provided they don't interfere with the employees’ ability to vote or intimidate them.

3. Distribute Written Materials:

Employers may distribute flyers, emails, or memos expressing their stance on unionization and encouraging employees to vote in the election.

4. Encourage Participation:

Employers can encourage employees to vote and explain the importance of participating in the election.

C.If your company needs assistance with a mail ballot during a mail ballot election at the NLRB, please contact

 H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

DOES A NEW CONTRACTOR WHO WINS A NEW FEDERAL JOB HAVE TO ASSUME THE PREDECESSOR UNION CONTRACT

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 02:17:30 GMT

October 28, 2024

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2. When a new contractor takes over a federal union job, the obligation to assume the existing union contract generally depends on several factors, especially those under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and the Service Contract Act (SCA), as well as specific determinations by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

Here are the key considerations:

3. Successorship Doctrine: Under the NLRB’s successorship doctrine, if a new contractor is considered a "successor employer" to the previous contractor, it may be required to recognize and bargain with the existing union if the union represents a majority of the new contractor’s workforce. However, the new contractor does not automatically have to assume the terms of the existing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) unless it voluntarily chooses to do so.

4. Duty to Bargain: While the new contractor is generally not obligated to adopt the existing CBA, it does have a duty to bargain with the union over the terms and conditions of employment. The new contractor may propose new terms, which can lead to renegotiation. However, during bargaining, the contractor must honor certain wages and benefits as stipulated by the Service Contract Act.

5. Service Contract Act (SCA): For federal service contracts covered by the SCA, the new contractor must typically pay wages and benefits that are at least as favorable as those under the existing union contract. This requirement helps ensure continuity for workers, even if the new contractor does not formally adopt the union’s CBA.

6."Perfectly Clear" Successor: If the new contractor clearly indicates an intention to retain the existing workforce under similar terms, it may be viewed as a "perfectly clear" successor. In this case, the NLRB may require the contractor to maintain the existing terms and conditions of employment temporarily and bargain with the union before making any unilateral changes.

7.In summary, the new contractor must recognize the union if it retains a majority of the previous contractor’s unionized workforce, but it is not necessarily bound by the prior union contract’s specific terms. The new contractor is expected to engage in good-faith bargaining with the union to establish new terms and conditions, adhering to any minimum standards required by the Service Contract Act.

8. If your company needs assistance in determining if you are a successor employer and is bound by the unions contract, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

EMPLOYERS CANNOT SEND TEXTS IN AN ELECTION THAT INTERROGATE OR THREATEN EMPLOYEES

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 12 Nov 2024 02:07:52 GMT

November 11, 2024

Tesla, Inc. , Board Case No. 32-CA-197020, reported at 370 NLRB No. 101 (5th Cir. decided October 25, 2024

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2. Since the passage of Cemex at the NLRB in December 2023, the NLRB has become more aggressive in finding Employers have violated the NLRB Act during elections. For example, at Telsa during an election, the UAW is trying to get the NLRB to order Tesla to bargain with their Union when Tesla used texts that threatened and interrogated it’s Employees.

3.The NLRB had found that Tesla committed a litany of unfair labor practices when it unlawfully responded to its employees’ organizing efforts by repeatedly coercing, threatening, and discriminating against them.

4. Among other violations, the Board found that Tesla violated Section 8(a)(1) by coercively interrogating employees on five occasions, threatening them in a “tweet” issued by its CEO with the loss of stock options if they unionized, and maintaining a confidentiality agreement that employees would reasonably interpret to interfere with protected activity, and restricting their use of the company’s messaging-and-data program in response to protected activity.

5.The Board also found that Tesla violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by discharging one key employee organizer, and warning another.

6. The Board adopted the Administrative Law Judge’s findings that Tesla violated Section 8(a)(1) by twice interfering with its employees’ distribution of union leaflets, prohibiting employees from distributing union materials, and threatening them with discharge if they did, and threatening that unionization would be futile.

7.If your company needs assistance in an Election not to violate the Act and be ordered to bargain with a union, by using texts to threaten or interrogate its employees, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

NLRB is seeking to order Trader Joes to reopen its New York location during an Organizing Drive

Mon, 28 Oct 2024 17:41:35 GMT

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a complaint against Trader Joes to force them to reopen its Manhattan wine shop to avoid bargaining with the UFCW.

3.The NLRB Allegations are Trader Joe's CLOSED the store in an attempt to discourage union organizing.

4.The complaint alleges that the grocer:

· Interrogated employees

· Threatened to cut employee benefits

· Told employees that joining a union would be "futile"

5. Remedies

The NLRB is seeking to compel Trader Joe's to reopen the store and provide "make-whole relief" for its workers.

6. Trader Joes knows that it will take many years to determine if NLRB will order them to reopen the store.

7. During this time Trader Joes will stay nonunion and will not have to bargain with the UFCW. Also, they have the financial resources to fight the NLRB.

8. If your company needs assistance in closing your operation during an organizing drive, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

An Employer that Hires Employees from an Employer that Goes Out of Business is not a Successor Employer

Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:37:07 GMT

October 21, 2024

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 An Employer that hires employees from an Employer that goes out of business is not a successor Employer.

3. A successor is an employer who either acquires all of the organization, trade, business, or substantially all the assets of another employer or employers, or acquires a distinct, severable, identifiable, and segregable portion of the business of another employer or employers and continues that portion of the business.

4. If a Successor Employer does not purchase the assets or the stock, or does not agree to assume any contracts, does not negotiate an contracts with the union, or purchases any equipment, the Successor Employer is not Successor Employer and is not bound by any union contracts.

5. Thus, if a union claims that the Successor Employer is bound by any Union contract, the union must show at the NLRB, that the Successor Employer did purchase the assets or stock of the previous employer or agrees to continues the previous business in a substantial way.

6. Since the union did not establish the new purchaser did not purchase the assets of the previous employer in a SUBSTANTIAL way, the NLRB dismissed the unions charge for 8(b)(3) bargaining in bad faith.

7.If your company needs assistance to Understand what is a Successor Employer or need assistance at the NLRB, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:07:04 GMT

Life is Peace 5 step formula will help resolve any conflict in the world. Every person, business, state, and nation must have the formula to resolve conflict, prevent adverse consequences and violence. “It is with the book “Life is Peace”.

Did You Know?

The book “Life is Peace” can be found in libraries and museums around the world.

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach and Instructor

The formula in the book LIFE IS PEACE can resolve any conflict. Each letter in the word PEACE stands for a specific principle:

P stands for Process.
E stands for Explanation of Positions
A stands for Acceptance of the Process
C stands for Compromise.
E stands for containment of Emotions.

The Air Force, Marines, West Point, and many libraries, museums, and religious institutions around the world have this book on how to Resolve Conflict. Please go to www.4lifevision.com and visit our reference page to see the hundreds of references from libraries, museums, and religious institutions.

Download the book at www.4lifevision.com or call 1-800-326-3046 for a copy. Also, there are private sessions available for individuals, businesses, schools, and seminars available for any conflict resolution. For Conflict Resolution Coaching call H. Sanford Rudnick at 1-800-326-3046.

CALIFORNIA BANS CAPTIVE AUDIENCE MEETING DURING AN ELECTION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 09 Oct 2024 21:27:10 GMT

October 7, 2024

1. California has become the 10th state to ban captive audience meetings, by signing a union-backed bill that bars employers from making workers attend meetings on religious or political matters, such as forming a union.

2. The bill is called The California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act into law.

3. SB 399, which will take effect on January 1, 2025, prohibits private and public employers in California from subjecting, or threatening to subject, an employee “to discharge, discrimination, retaliation, or any other adverse action because the employee declines to attend an employer-sponsored meeting or affirmatively declines to participate in, receive, or listen to any communications with the employer or its agents or representatives, the purpose of which is to communicate the employer’s opinion about religious or

4. California joins Hawaii, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Washington and Vermont that have passed laws banning, restricting or regulating captive audience meetings that cover the topic of unionizations.

5. However, employers can have meetings with their employees as long as they plainly state the meetings are voluntary and will not be terminated or disciplined.

6. If you have any questions about captive audience meetings or any other matter at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick at H. Sanford Rudnick and Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

IF A UNION ALLOWS AN EMPLOYER TO CONTINUE TO PAY ITS WORKERS FAIR WAGES AND BENEFITS IT WILL OBTAIN A CONTRACT

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 01 Oct 2024 11:04:02 GMT

September 30, 2024

1 Apple Workers Ratify 1st Contract at its Oklahoma store.

2. If a Union allows Employers to

obtain reasonable wages and benefits

during negotiations, the Employer will probably accept their Contract.

3. Retail workers represented by the Communications Workers of America at an Apple store in Oklahoma City ratified a first contract, the union announced Tuesday, saying the three-year deal includes wage increases, a grievance process and weeks of severance pay.

4. As you can see with the acceptance of a contract with Apple by the Communication Workers of America, unions might be able to obtain a contracts at Starbucks and Amazon if they propose a reasonable contract .

5. If you have any questions about your negotiations or any other matter at the NLRB, please contact Sanford Rudnick at H. Sanford Rudnick and Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

THE NLRB IS SEEKING A BARGAINING ORDER AGAINST TRADER JOES AFTER AN ELECTION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 23 Sep 2024 22:27:16 GMT

1. In an election, management cannot threaten, interrogate, make promises and spy on the Union.

2. In the case, Trader Joe's vs 373 NLRB No. 73, 16-CA-291179, the NLRB alleges Trader Joe's illegally fired a union worker, posted false information about the union, unlawfully interrogated union workers, threatened to freeze workers' wages if they unionized, gave union workers worse retirement benefits and forced workers to attend unlawful “captive audience.” that was not voluntary.

3. The UFCW and the NLRB is seeking a bargaining order to force Trader Joes to bargain with the union.

4. With the new laws of Cemex, the NLRB will probably win a bargaining order but Trader Joes might appeal the NLRB decision through the federal courts which could take years to resolve.

5. If you have any questions about your election campaign, please contact Sanford Rudnick at H. Sanford Rudnick and Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CANNOT THREATEN EMPLOYEES WITH A TEXT DURING AN ELECTION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 16 Sep 2024 23:10:44 GMT

1. Starbucks Corporation ( 18-CA-299560; 373 NLRB No. 90 ) Minneapolis, MN, August 28, 2024.

2 The Board ruled that Starbucks violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act when, after employees filed an election petition, a Starbucks supervisor coercively interrogated an employee by a text message by making several threatening statements.

3. Additionally, the Board stated Starbucks did not violate Section 8(a)(1) by expressing its views about unionization during a meeting.

4. Thus, in an election an Employer cannot threaten an employee by their statements, handouts, and texts or any other methods of threats to their employees.

5. Also, in an election an employer should generally not state its opinion on a union but might state employees can vote for or against a union since they live in a democracy. Also, all meeting with the employees have to be voluntary.

6. If you have any questions about your election campaign, please contact Sanford Rudnick at H. Sanford Rudnick and Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER GENERALLY SHOULD NOT DISCHARGE AN EMPLOYEE DURING A UNION ELECTION CAMPAIGN

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 28 Aug 2024 21:28:51 GMT

8-25-24
Art Directors Guild, Local 800, IATSE ( 31-CA-268924; 372 NLRB No. 123 ) Studio City, CA, August 15, 2023.

1 The NLRB, revered the Administrative Law Judge, and dismissed the complaint allegation that the Employer, violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by discharging an employee for her role in a successful organizing campaign by the Employer’s employees.

2. In so doing, the NLRB majority found it unnecessary to pass on whether the General Counsel sustained her initial burden of proof under Wright Line , and that the Respondent carried its rebuttal burden by demonstrating that it would have discharged the employee for lawful reasons even in the absence of her union activities.

3. Under the Wright Line standard, an employee’s unfair labor practice charge based on discharge or discipline for engaging in protected conduct requires that the party discharged party or the general counsel, must prove the adverse action establishes the following three (3) elements:

a. The employee engaged in Section 7 activity.

b. The employer knew of that activity.

c. A causal connection exists between the Section 7 activity and the adverse action.

4. If all three elements are met, then the employer must prove it would have taken the same disciplinary action if the employee had not engaged in a protected activity.

5. In the instant case, the Employer had a legitimate business reason to terminate their employee even though it was during a union election.

TEACH YOUR WORKERS A FORMULA TO OVERCOME REJECTION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 19 Aug 2024 17:53:26 GMT

1. To become a better Employer, Employers need to teach themselves and their workers a formula to overcome Rejection.

2. Every day Employers and employees go through some type of rejection in their business or their personal life.

3.Employers and employees need to learn a formula to overcome rejection to become a success:

Click here for the PREVIEW VERSION of “The Five Letter of Jesus will help you overcome Rejection 2024”

4.Thus, Sanford Rudnick JD, over many years discovered that the letters of the major religions could be used to overcome rejection. These videos are not religious videos but an easy tool to remember rejection is success.

5. If your Company wants to motivate your employees on how to overcome rejection, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at sandy@rudnickpro.com , 1-800-326-3046 or go to www.4lifevision.com to purchase this video, books or give a seminar to your employees how to overcome rejection.

An oral agreement can modify the finding of a audit of a Trust Fund

Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:56:38 GMT

August 12, 2024

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB or audits by Trust Funds.

2. A Trust Fund audited an Employer for health and welfare payments.

3. The Trust Fund stated the Employer owed over $100,000.

4.The Employer stated there was an oral agreement between the Union and the Employer and that the Employer did not need to make benefit payments.

5. According to Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Kroger Co., 226 F.3d 903 (7th Cir. 2000) the court held:

6. Since the employer and the union had a specific oral agreement, the trust fund allowed the audit to be modified to reflect the oral Agreement.

7. If your Company is going through an Trust Audit and needs some defenses to the audit, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER IN AN ELECTION CANNOT SOLICIT BENEFITS OR THREATEN EMPLOYEES WITH LOSS OF BENEFITS

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Thu, 08 Aug 2024 21:32:31 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 During an election an Employer cannot solicit grievances or threaten employees for loss of employee wages and benefits.

3. Starbucks Corporation (03-CA-310676; 373 NLRB No.75) Liverpool, NY, July 24, 2024.

The Board ruled and Employer violated Section 8(a)(1) when, in the runup to an election, it solicited grievances, made threats, and increased management's in-store presence to create the impression of surveillance.

4. If your Company is going through an Election and wants to prevent the union from filing any unfair labor

practice charges,please sample, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-866-360-5592.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

The major problem in any election or an unfair labor practice charge, is how to resolve conflict between management and your employees. In fact, according to the NLRB there is an 16% increase in unfair labor practices charges being filed by employees or unions in 2023.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Thu, 01 Aug 2024 09:06:17 GMT

LIFE VISION

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

Conflict Resolution Specialists and Labor Consultants Presents:

LIFE IS PEACE

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING

THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

Life is Peace 5 step formula will help resolve any conflict in the world.

Every person, business, state, and nation must have the formula to resolve conflict, prevent adverse consequences and violence.

“It is with the book “Life is Peace”.

Did you know?

The book “Life is Peace” can be found in libraries and museums around the world

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

The formula in the book LIFE IS PEACE can resolve any conflict. Each letter in the word PEACE stands for a specific

principle:

P stands for Process.
E stands for Explanation of Positions
A stands for Acceptance of the Process
C stands for Compromise.
E stands for containment of Emotions.

The Air Force, Marines, West Point, and many libraries, museums, and religious institutions around the world have this

book on how to Resolve Conflict. Please go to www.elifevision and visit our reference page to see the hundreds of

references from libraries, museums, and religious institutions.

Download the book at www.elifevision.com or call 1-800-326-3046 for a copy. Also, there are private sessions available

for individuals, businesses, schools, and seminars available for any conflict resolution. For Conflict Resolution Coaching

call H. Sanford Rudnick at 1-800-326-3046.

Receive a green wrist band with the word PEACE on the band as a gift with Life is Peace book purchase.

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

1990 No. California Blvd. S 830

Walnut Creek, Ca. 94596

1-800-326-3046

AN EMPLOYER CAN EDUCATE ITS EMPLOYEES IN AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN WITH A VIDEO ABOUT A UNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 22 Jul 2024 23:50:38 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 When an election petition is filed at the NLRB, an Employer is looking for a method of campaigning to reach their many employees.

3. Now H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates, a labor relations firm that does election campaigns, has created specific websites about all Unions who filed an election petition.

4. The website discusses the effect of collective bargaining, union promises, union dues and strikes in an election campaign for your specific union.

5. If your company is going through an election campaign and wants to see a sample website or to do a website to discuss your specific union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CAN USE A WEBSITE AGAINST A UNION IN AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:01:09 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 With the new Cemex Rules to make it easier for Unions to win an election, Unions will generally file objections to any election to try to overturn an employer win.

3. However, if an employer wins an election, a union still has to prove the employer committed unfair labor practices charges.

4. If the employer’s employees do not give any evidence of the employers unfair labor practices, then the NLRB will overrule the union’s objections.

5. If the employees do not give any evidence of violating the Act, such as threats or promises, then a union cannot file exceptions to the election.

6. If your company needs assistance to understand the process when a Union files objections to an election, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

A UNION MUST GET EMPLOYEES TO GIVE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR OBJECTIONS IN AN ELECTION TO OVERTURN AN ELECTION WIN BY AN EMPLOYER

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 09 Jul 2024 20:58:10 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 With the new Cemex Rules to make it easier for Unions to win an election, Unions will generally file objections to any election to try to overturn an employer win.

3. However, if an employer wins an election, a union still has to prove the employer committed unfair labor practices charges.

4. If the employer’s employees do not give any evidence of the employers unfair labor practices, then the NLRB will overrule the union’s objections.

5. If the employees do not give any evidence of violating the Act, such as threats or promises, then a union cannot file exceptions to the election.

6. If your company needs assistance to understand the process when a Union files objections to an election, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

A UNION CAN DISCLAIM INTEREST FROM AN EMPLOYER

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 01 Jul 2024 21:00:23 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 As an Employer knows there are 3 ways a Employer can move in a nonunion direction.

3. First, employees can file an RD election with (30%) of their employees between 60-90 days prior to the termination of their contract on a voluntary basis at the NLRB.

4. Second, management can file an RM petition between 60-90 days prior to the termination of the agreement on a voluntary basis at the NLRB.

5. Third, employees with more than 50% can file a petition 90 days prior to the termination of the agreement. An Employer can withdraw recognition from the Union pursuant to Johnson Controls, 368 NLRB No. 20 (2019)

6.There is a 4 ^th method to decertify a union which is when the employees can ask the union to disclaim interest from the Employer even during the term of the agreement.

7. If a union does disclaim interest from an Employer, then the Union will not file any objections as in an election.

8. If your company needs assistance to understand the process when a Union might disclaim interest from your Company, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

INDEPENDENT EMPLOYEE UNIONS CAN VOTE TO TRANSFER THEIR MEMBERSHIP TO AN ACTUAL UNION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:32:32 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 Workers at the only unionized Amazon warehouse in the U.S. have voted to fold their independent union into the Teamsters.

3. Employers should not believe their workers when they vote to represent themselves at their company.

4. Once an in-house independent union tries to negotiate a new contract without success then they will try to vote for an actual union.

5. Thus, an in the case of Amazon, their in house union voted to have the Teamsters represent them for collective bargaining. The workers believe the Teamsters have superior bargaining power.

6.Thus, Employers should be aware that if their employees vote have an in house independent union, this is the first step in voting to transfer their membership to an actual union.

7. If your company needs assistance about the process where their employees vote to transfer their in- house independent union to an actual union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CAN WITHDRAW RECOGNITION FROM A UNION 90 PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION OF THEIR CONTRACT ACCORDING TO JOHNSON CONTROLS

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:17:18 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 If employees do a petition on a voluntary basis that states the majority of its employees do not want to be represent by a union, an Employer can withdraw recognition from a union 90 days prior the expiration their contract.

3. This is based upon the case Johnson Controls, 368 NLRB No. 20 (2019)

4. The petition has to be voluntary and done by the majority of the employees.

5. The employees have to give their petition to their Employer and the Employer has to verify the signatures of his employees.

6.The website National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation explains how an employee can obtain the petition.

7. Once an Employer receives a petition on a voluntary basis, the Employer must contact their union and state the Employer received objective evidence that the union no longer represents the majority of its employees.

8. Then a union has 45 days to get another petition from their employees and file RC election at the NLRB to get an election to determine if their employees want to be represented by their union.

9. If your company needs assistance to understand the process of the case Johnson Controls that their employees do not want to be represented by their union, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYEE THAT FILES AN CA CHARGE FROM OUT OF THE COUNTRY DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION AT THE NLRB

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Fri, 14 Jun 2024 20:23:27 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 An Employer that hires employees from an Employer that goes out of business is not a successor Employer.

6.If your company needs assistance to Understand what is a Successor Employer or need assistance at the NLRB, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER THAT HIRES EMPLOYEES FROM AN EMPLOYER THAT GOES OUT OF BUSINESS IS NOT A SUCCESSOR EMPLOYER

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Fri, 07 Jun 2024 01:36:52 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 An Employer that hires employees from an Employer that goes out of business is not a successor Employer.

6.If your company needs assistance to Understand what is a Successor Employer or need assistance at the NLRB, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CANNOT PROHIBIT ITS EMPLOYEES FROM DISCUSSING THEIR WAGES AND BENEFITS AT WORK

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 29 May 2024 07:09:19 GMT

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2. On May 16,2024 Mercedes had an election with the UAW. Mercedes won the Election 2642 to 2045.

3. The reason why Mercedes won the election was Mecedes covered the BACES with it’s employees. This means Mercedes’s paid good wages and (B)enefits, had good (A)dvancement, (C)ommunication, employees were treated (E)quitably and there was job (S)ecurity.

4. Other reasons why the UAW lost the election was the majority of the employees did not TRUST the Union.

5. However, even though the UAW lost their election, they will try to get Mercedes to bargain with the Union based upon their alleged unfair labor practices that were committed by Mercedes. The UAW will surely file objections to the Election.

6. The UAW will try to overturn the election based upon the new rules in Cemex. However, this will take years of litigation between the UAW and Mercedes at the NLRB and through the federal courts.

7. If your company needs assistance to win an election or at the NLRB, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

THE UAW WILL TRY TO GET MERCEDES TO BARGAIN WITH THEM

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Mon, 20 May 2024 20:26:32 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 Most Employers know that any union cannot get an election unless at least 30% of their employees do not sign union cards.

3. Recently, the NLRB issued a complaint on May 9, 2024, against Tesla in Buffalo for generally prohibiting employees from discussing unions.

4. Telsa in Buffalo has approximately 2025 employees. Tesla recently laid off approximately 500 employees due to a world wide slow down in EV sales.

5. However, the real reason why the UAW filed charges at the NLRB against Tesla was that they really could not get 30% or 625 employees to sign union cards for an election.

6. Tesla covers the BACES with its employees, that is, they pay good wages and (B)enefits, has good (A)dvancement, (C)ommunication, employees are treated (E)quitably and there is job (S)ecurity.

7. If your company needs assistance in learning about the process of employees signing union cards, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

THE UAW UNION CANNOT REPRESENT EMPLOYEES NEW EV AUTO MAKERS SINCE THEY CANNOT GET 30% OF EMPLOYEES TO SIGN UNION CARDS

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 14 May 2024 00:14:04 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 Most Employers know that any union cannot get an election unless at least 30% of their employees do not sign union cards.

3. Recently, the NLRB issued a complaint on May 9, 2024, against Tesla in Buffalo for generally prohibiting employees from discussing unions.

4. Telsa in Buffalo has approximately 2025 employees. Tesla recently laid off approximately 500 employees due to a world wide slow down in EV sales.

5. However, the real reason why the UAW filed charges at the NLRB against Tesla was that they really could not get 30% or 625 employees to sign union cards for an election.

6. Tesla covers the BACES with its employees, that is, they pay good wages and (B)enefits, has good (A)dvancement, (C)ommunication, employees are treated (E)quitably and there is job (S)ecurity.

7. If your company needs assistance in learning about the process of employees signing union cards, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

WHAT IS THE EFFECT WHEN ELECTION PETITION IS FILED AND YOUR EMPLOYEES ARE SILENT

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Wed, 08 May 2024 13:15:38 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases at the NLRB.

2 In a Union election, an Employer cannot threaten, interrogate, promise or spy on the union.

3. Also, an Employer cannot solicit grievances from their employees.

4. If the employees remain silent in the election this only shows management has poor communication with its employees.

5. If the employees remain silent in the election this will mean the Employer will lose the election.

6. Lack of communication is one of the five reasons why employees go to a third party.

7. If you want to avoid an election loss for lack of communication with your employees, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

AN EMPLOYER CAN USE A WEBSITE TO HELP THE EMPLOYER TO COMMUNICATE TO EMPLOYEES DURING AN ELECTION

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Tue, 30 Apr 2024 06:28:10 GMT

1 Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases that going on at the NLRB.

2 In an election, an Employer can still hold voluntary group meetings, give handouts, and videos to discuss his message about the union.

3. Also, an Employer can build a website to help Communicate to their employes during an election campaign or any other reason when the Employer has too many employees to communicate to.

4. An Employer might use specific website when there are more than 15 employees in the election.

5. H. Sanford Rudnick & Associate used an election website in a campaign against the SEIU to communicate the Employers message to the employees.

6. After the Employer created a website that was put on line that concerned 300 employees, the SEIU withdrew their election campaign.

7. If an Employer would like to see an a sample election website for any union election, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

WHEN AN EMPLOYER SHOULD VOLUNTARILY RECOGNIZE A UNION

Mon, 22 Apr 2024 22:09:55 GMT

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases that going on at the NLRB.

2. Recently, the Laborers union filed an Election petition with a Construction Employer at the NLRB.

3. The parties entered into an election agreement using the Daniels formula in that all employees could vote who worked for the Employer 30 days in one year or 45 days in a 2 year period.

4. Then the Union filed an NLRB charge stating more employees were eligible to vote in the election alleging the employees were terminated for filing a Department of Labor Charge for not being paid the correct wage rate, etc.

5. If a union files a charge at the NLRB alleging employees are owed money or other matters, an Employer might consider Voluntarily Recognizing the union in exchange for resolving the unfair labor charges.

6. The reason for this is the NLRB will consolidate any election challenges, objections and unfair labor practices after the election in a hearing which could take a year or more to resolve.

7. If an Employer could resolve any pending unfair labor practices by Voluntarily Recognizing the union, then the Employer would save a lot money in litigation fees at the NLRB.

8. If an Employer has any questions about the Election process, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates At 1-800-326-3046.

Fundamentals of Labor Law

Sanford Rudnick has written a book called Fundamentals of Labor Law which helps Employers practice at the NLRB. He has used this book for over 40 years.

Sanford Rudnick has gotten this book into many law schools around the country such as Harvard and USC Law School.

Also, Sanford Rudnick has gotten other books on Resolution of Conflict into the Library of Congress and many other libraries around the world.

Sanford Rudnick uses these principles in these books to win elections and to resolve charge at the NLRB. Call H. Sanford

Rudnick & Associates to purchase these books at

1-800-326-3046.

THE UNION FILES OBJECTIONS TO AN ELECTION EVEN WHEN AN EMPLOYER WINS AN ELECTION

Tue, 16 Apr 2024 00:41:56 GMT

1. Employers should note that the weekly emails that are being sent from H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates are current cases that going on at the NLRB.

2. Recently, an Employer won an election against the Machinists Union. However, the Union filed objections

to the Election. The Employer contends the objections

by the Union were not for legitimate business reasons. Also, this conduct by the Union, makes an Employer spends thousands of dollars in defending itself.

3. Under the Cemex Rules, there is no longer Gissel orders that the NLRB uses to determine if a Bargaining Order should be issued against an Employer.

4. This means that any conduct, even an 8(a)(3) action,

like a termination of an employee for legitimate business reasons during an election or any other conduct, the NLRB might seek a bargaining Order in an Election. This could take months to determine. During this time the is no bargaining going on between the parties.

5. With the Change in the rules of an election, under Cemex, the NLRB wants to over-ride any election

to determine if employees want to be represented

by a union.

6. What the NLRB is seeking to do is, if an Union get a showing of interest of employees with between 30%- 50% support, they want an Employer to go directly to bargaining. The NLRB wants to eliminate the election

Process.

7. Employers believes the NLRB is being biased against Employers in favor of Unions.

8. If an Employer has any questions about the Election process, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates

At 1-800-326-3046.

WHAT THE NLRB NEEDS TO PROVE IN A DISCHARGE CASE (CA).

Wed, 10 Apr 2024 05:15:25 GMT

Since early 75% of all NLRB charges that are filed at the NLRB relate to unlawful discharges of employees, the NLRB must still prove that the discharge was the Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action.
As a general rule, the NLRB can meet burden of proof in discharge or retaliation cases by relying in whole or in part on circumstantial evidence as stated in Intertape Polymer Corp.
The Board stated the GC has the burden under the established Wright Line test, which requires the GC to first demonstrate that protected activity was a Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action alleged to be unlawful.
The Board explained that the GC can satisfy this burden where the record as a whole supports a reasonable inference that protected activity was Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action. Thus, the employer's motive can be inferred from direct or circumstantial evidence.
However, most of the time when a discharge case or (8)(a)(3) is filed at the NLRB by an employee or a union, the NLRB will find the case is a credibility issue which means the NLRB will not decide who is telling the truth between a union or employee or the employer but will issue a complaint.
If the NLRB is about to issue a complaint, an Employer does not have to go to trial but can enter a Board settlement to resolve the unlawful discharge case by paying a monetary settlement and posting a 60 day notice at their facility.

UPDATE:UNIONS ARE WINNING MORE ELECTIONS

Tue, 09 Apr 2024 22:50:23 GMT

1. Since 2022, Unions are wining more elections

at the NLRB. According to Bloomberg Law, now Unions win 80% of all elections.

2. Since Employers must comply with the new Cemex time limits at the NLRB, a Union Election is generally held within 20 days. Employers have the following methods of communication to their employees:

A. A video to show to your employees;

B. A custom website for your employees

to learn about the Union if they have a large unit;

C. Voluntary meetings for your employees; and

D. Handouts to your employees in multiple language, etc.

If your firm needs assistance at the NLRB, an election campaign or unfair labor practice charges, please contact:

Sanford Rudnick JD 1-800-326-3046

ELECTION PETITIONS ARE UP 35% AND UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CHARGES ARE UP 7% AT THE NLRB FOR 2024

Tue, 09 Apr 2024 22:49:03 GMT

1.During the first six months of Fiscal Year 2024 (October 1–March 31), union election petitions filed at the NLRB rose 35% over the same period in Fiscal Year 2023 .

2.Notably, this is driven by a spike in employer-filed RM-petitions, after the Board’s Cemex decision , accompanied by an uptick in employee-filed RC-petitions. In total, 1,618 petitions were filed during this time, compared with 1,199 in the first half of Fiscal Year 2023. Of the recent petitions, 1,137 were RC-petitions and 281 were RM-petitions.

3. At the same time, unfair labor practice (ULP) charges filed across the NLRB’s field offices have increased 7%—from 9,612 to 10,278. Accounting for union petitions and unfair labor practice charges, the NLRB received 11,896 cases in the first half of Fiscal Year 2024, up 10% over the first half of Fiscal Year 2023 when the field offices received 10,811 cases.

4. However, if an employer wins an election and the union files any unfair labor practices charges, and the union seeks a bargaining order this could take a year or more to resolve. During this the RC petition is stayed and there is no bargaining with the union.

5. If you need any assistance with NLRB Elections or Unfair Labor Practice Charges, please contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates at 1-800-326-3046

IF YOU HAVE A MEETING WITH YOUR EMPLOYEES CONCERNING AN ELECTION, YOU MUST TELL YOUR EMPLOYEES IT IS VOLUNTARY OR IT VIOLATES THE ACT AS BEING COERCIVE

Fri, 05 Apr 2024 15:05:59 GMT

Starbucks Corporation ( 31-CA-299257; 373 NLRB No. 33 ) Los Angeles, CA, March 6, 2024.

The NRLB adopted the Administrative Law Judge's conclusions that the Respondent violated Section 8 (a) (1) by interrogating an employee and by threatening her with economic reprisals as well as the judge's dismissal of the Section (a)(1) captive audience meeting allegation.
The Board declined to order the extraordinary remedies recommended by the judge.
This means that Starbucks only had to post a notice at its location for 60 days.
Also, if an Employer has a meeting with its employees it has to tell the employees the meeting is voluntary orally or in writing and they can leave at any time. Otherwise the meeting is coercive and the NLRB will find a violation of the Act.

HOW TO PRACTICE BEFORE THE NLRB WHEN AN ELECTION PETITION IS FILED BY A UNION AGAINST YOUR COMPANY.

Fri, 15 Mar 2024 12:30:14 GMT

Today there were Seven RC election petitions filed against Employers at the NLRB throughout the US filed by different Unions. These unions probably obtained at least 50% of their employees to sign union cards. During the election, the company cannot threaten the employees, interrogate the employees, make any promises or spy the union.
The reason why an election petition was filed against your company was probably the LACK OF TRUST at your company by your employees. The employees believed their company does not pay adequate wages and benefits, has no advancement for the employees, poor communication with management, the employees were not treated equitably and there was no job security for the employees.
According to the rules and regulations at the NLRB, these companies might consider doing an election stipulation with the NLRB and have an election within 20 days.
Employees have the right to vote for or against the Union either by a mail or manual secret ballot.
As of now, the NLRB still holds a mail ballot for the employees due to covid. However, a manual vote still might be held at your company by the NLRB.
Also, these companies have to do a NLRB payroll list and send it to the Union and the NLRB within 2 days once a stipulation has been approved by the Regional Director.
During these 20 days, the Union and a Company can do an election campaign by holding employee meetings on a voluntary basis, showing videos or doing election handouts to determine if the employees want or do not want a union.
If a company does meetings with their employees they have to be voluntary and there can be no discipline to the employees if they do not attend the meetings.
At the end of the 20 days, the employees can send their ballot back to NLRB. However, the employees can decide on a voluntary basis they do NOT want to send their ballots back to NLRB.
It is possible the NLRB will give the employees 45 days to return their mail ballot back to NLRB.
At the end of the 45 days, the NLRB will hold a zoom election meeting with the companies to count the ballots to determine if the employees will vote for a union or against a union. In order to win the election, a union or the company must win by a majority of the vote or a tie by management.
After the NLRB gives the results to the election, either a union or a company can file objections to an election within 7 days of the results of an election.
Is it possible if a union wins an election, the company can proceed to negotiations to try to enter into a contract with the union without filling objections. However, a Union cannot force an employer into a contract that is not fair, just and equitable for an Employer

WIN AN ELECTION WITH A VIDEO CALLED “GET THE REAL STORY ABOUT ANY UNION”

Tue, 12 Mar 2024 21:30:47 GMT

As you know with the new shorter Cemex time limits at NLRB for union elections, you need a tool to show your employees to win your election in 7 minutes.
No H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates has produced a video to win your election which is called "Get the Real Story about any Union".
The video is about 7 minutes which discusses the effect of union finances, bargaining, union promises, cost of union membership, strikes and voting and much more about a specific union.
The video is a good video for training purposes even if you are not in a union election.
Contact H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates to see a preview video for your specific union or a website that will win you at 1-800-326-3046.

How to Resolve an Employer’s Unfunded Pension Liability (UPL)

Thu, 22 Feb 2024 23:54:51 GMT

If an Employer has a union contract and either sells, goes out of business, or retires, it might have an unexpected unfunded pension liability (UPL) If they have a union pension plan.
An Employer should write a letter to the Union pension plan at least one year in advance to determine if they have a UPL before they discontinue their Business.
If the Employer does have an UPL to the Pension Trust, it is best to resolve the UPL with a written settlement. There are many circumstances where an Employer does not have to pay his UPL.
The pension trust and Employer can enter into a settlement to reduce their UPL where the Employer can remit a lump sum payment to the Trust Fund for a reduced amount.
If the Employer cannot enter into a settlement to resolve their UPL then the parties can enter into a 20 Year Agreement to pay off their UPL.

THE NLRB FINDS AMAZON RETAILIATES AGAINST EMPLOYEE ORGANIZERS

Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:14:45 GMT

THE NLRB FINDS AMAZON RETAILIATES AGAINST EMPLOYEE ORGANIZERS

December 01, 2023

1 On November 21, 2023, the NLRB issued a decision finding that Amazon.com Services LLC (Amazon) violated the National Labor Relations Act by dismissing employees early, altering employees’ work assignments, and subjecting employees to closer supervision in retaliation for the employees’ support for the Amazon Labor Union (the Union), or for engaging in protected concerted activities.

2 The decision also found Amazon unlawfully interrogated employees, disparaged the Union by using appeals to racial prejudice and derogatory racial stereotyping, and prohibited employees from distributing Union literature and confiscating Union literature from employees.

3 The NLRB ordered Amazon to cease and desist from further unlawful activity and to make the adversely affected worker whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits including any other direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms and any adverse tax consequences. Amazon must also post copies of a Notice to Employees for 60 days and distribute the Notice to Employees electronically.

4 “Workers have the right to advocate collectively for a more equitable workplace — and it is unlawful for employers to prohibit or retaliate against them for doing so,” said the NLRB Region 29 .

The Judge’s Decision and Order was issued based on a Complaint and Notice of Hearing . issued by Region 29 of the NLRB.

WHAT THE NLRB NEEDS TO PROVE IN A DISCHARGE CASE (CA).

Fri, 02 Feb 2024 12:26:49 GMT

Since nearly 75% of all NLRB charges that are Filed at the NLRB relate to unlawful discharges of employees, the NLRB must still prove that the discharge was the Motivation Factor in the adverse employment action.
As a general rule, the NLRB can meet burden of proof in discharge or retaliation cases by relying in whole or in part on circumstantial evidence as stated in Intertape Polymer Corp. , 372 NLRB No. 133 (2023).
The Board stated the GC has the burden under the established Wright Line test, which requires the GC to first demonstrate that protected activity was a Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action alleged to be unlawful.
The Board explained that the GC can satisfy this burden where the record as a whole supports a reasonable inference that protected activity was a Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action. Thus, the employer's motive can be inferred from direct or circumstantial evidence.
However, most of the time when a discharge case or (8) (a) (3) is filed at the NLRB by an employee or a union, the NLRB will find the case is a credibility issue which means the NLRB will not decide who is telling the truth between a union or employee or the Employer but will issue a complaint.
If the NLRB is about to issue a complaint, an Employer does not have to go to trial but can enter a Board settlement to resolve the unlawful discharge case by paying a monetary settlement and posting a 60 day notice at their facility.

AN EMPLOYER WILL BE ORDERED TO BARGAIN BY THE NLRB AFTER LOSING AN ELECTION.

Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:45:50 GMT

Cognizant Technology Solutions U.S. Corporation and Google, LLC, Joint Employers ( 16-CA-326027; 373 NLRB No. 9 ) Austin, TX, January 3, 2024.

1.The CWA (Union) won an election against the above Employer.

2.The NLRB issued a certification that the Employer had to bargain for a year.

3.The Employer refused to bargain with the Union.

4.The Board found that the Employer violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1) by failing and refusing to recognize and bargain with the Union.

5.The Board extended the bargaining year against the Employer and considered the issue of whether the Board should adopt a compensatory, make whole remedy for the Employer’s refusal to bargain.

6.This means the Employer would have to pay the union’s legal and bargaining costs of the union for not bargaining with the Union.

WHAT THE NLRB NEEDS TO PROVE IN A DISCHARGE CASE.

Thu, 11 Jan 2024 21:01:21 GMT

Since nearly 75% of all NLRB charges that are Filed at the NRLB relate to unlawful discharges of employees, the NLRB must still prove that the discharge was the Motivation Factor in the adverse employment action.
As a general rule, the NLRB can meet burden of proof in discharge or retaliation cases by relying in whole or in part on circumstantial evidence, as stated in Intertape Polymer Corp. , 372 NLRB No. 133 (2023)
The Board stated the GC has the burden under the established Wright Line test, which requires the GC to first demonstrate that protected activity was a Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action alleged to be unlawful.
The Board explained that the GC can satisfy this burden where the record as a whole supports a reasonable inference that protected activity was a Motivating Factor in the adverse employment action. Thus, the employer's motive can be inferred from direct or circumstantial evidence.
However, most of the time when a discharge case or (8)(a)(3) is filed at the NLRB by an employee or a union, the NLRB will find the case is a credibility issue which means the NLRB will not decide who is telling the truth between a union or employee or the Employer but will issue a complaint.
If the NLRB is about to issue a complaint, an Employer does not have to go to trial but can enter a Board settlement to resolve the unlawful discharge case by paying a monetary settlement and posting a 60-day notice at their facility.

AN EMPLOYER CAN FILE AN RM ELECTION PETITION WHEN THE UNION STATES THEY REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF THE EMPLOYEES AT THEIR COMPANY.

Tue, 02 Jan 2024 20:22:12 GMT

1. The NLRB has stated under the new Cemex election rules, if the Union has submitted a letter to an Employer that the Union represents the majority of employees in the company, an Employer must file an RM petition stating the Employer disagrees with the Union. The Employer must file an election petition within two weeks when the election petition filed at the NLRB.

2. During the month of December 2023, Employers throughout the US have filed approximately 53 RM petitions at the NLRB.

3. This means almost 30% of all elections that were filed at the NLRB in December 2023, shows Employers do not believe the union represents the majority of their employees.

4 Thus, Employers want to have an election to determine the status of their employees if they want to be represented.

5. According to the rules and regulations at the NLRB, your company might consider doing an election stipulation with the NLRB and have an election. The NLRB has stated they will conduct an election that is “soon as practicable”.

6. This means that if an Employer wants to do an election campaign against a union, the Employer should start a campaign as soon as the petition was filed by the union.

7. Also, the Board has held that if the Employer commits any unfair labor practice charge, it might be ordered to bargain with the Union.

8. If the Employer challenges the Union’s alleged unfair labor practice charges and the NLRB determination it wants to order you to bargain due to the union’s alleged unfair labor practice charges, even if you won the election, this could take months or years to resolve at the NLRB.

9. It is possible if a union wins an election, the company can proceed to negotiations. However, the union still cannot force an Employer to enter into a contract that is not fair, just, and equitable to your company.

How to Resolve an Employer’s Unfunded Pension Liability (UPL)

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 15:04:33 GMT

1. If an Employer has a union contract and either sells, goes out of business, or retires, it might have an unexpected unfunded pension liability (UPL) If they have a union pension plan.

2. An Employer should write a letter to the Union pension plan a least one year in advance to determine if they have an UPL before they discontinue their Business.

3. If the Employer does have an UPL to the Pension Trust, it is best to resolve the UPL with a written settlement. There are many circumstances where an Employer does not have to pay his UPL.

4. The pension trust and Employer can enter into a settlement to reduce their UPL where the Employer can remit a lump sum payment to the Trust Fund for a reduced amount.

5. If the Employer cannot enter into a settlement to resolve their UPL then the parties can enter into a 20 Year Agreement to pay off their UPL.

THE 17 STEPS TO FOLLOW AT THE NLRB WHEN THERE IS AN UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE IS FILED

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 15:03:38 GMT

1. An individual or labor organization may file an unfair labor practice charge with a regional office in the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for discharges of employees for union and/ or protective concerted activities, collective bargaining and many other reasons.

2. The NLRB will investigate the charge unless there is no merit to the case and the NLRB will dismiss the charge;

3. At least FIFTY percent of all NLRB charges are for discharges of employees. This means an Employer cannot terminate an employee for their union and/ or their protected concerted activities.

4. The NLRB uses the Wright Line Standard to determine if the employee was discharge without violating the NLRB Act.

5. Under the Wright Line standard, an employee unfair labor practice charge based on discharge or discipline for engaging in protected conduct requires that the party discharged party or the general counsel must prove the adverse action establishes the following three elements:

1. The employee engaged in Section 7 activity.

2. The employer knew of that activity.

3. A causal connection exists between the Section 7 activity and the adverse action.

6. If all three elements are met, then the employer must prove it would have taken the same disciplinary action if the employee had not engaged in a protected activity.

7. Applying the Wright Line test, the NLRB will find an unfair labor practice if “the [employee] shows that the Section 7 activity was a Motivating factor in the discipline, and the employer fails to show that it would have issued the same discipline even in the absence of the related Section 7 activity.”

8. In short, engaging in Section 7 activity does not insulate employees from “nondiscriminatory discipline” under recent case law of General Motors standard, but “it is unlawful for employers to target employees who engage in Section 7 activity and subject them to discipline that would not have occurred but for that protected activity.”

9. The NLRB will ask for a response if there is sufficient evidence presented in case at the NLRB;

10.The NLRB will attempt to settle the underlying dispute:

11. If a settlement cannot be reached, the NLRB will generally issue a formal complaint against the employer;

12. If a complaint issues and the matter is not settled, an evidentiary hearing will be convened before an administrative law judge of the NLRB;

13. An administrative judge will rule on the hearing;

14. The judge’s opinion can be appealed to the NLRB in Washington, D.C.;

15. If the Judge rules in favor of the NLRB it can be appealed to the federal appellate courts;

16. An Employer found to have engaged in an unfair labor practice under the NLRA can be required to:

A. Cease and desist from any such further conduct;

B. Reinstate an employee who has been unlawfully discharged;

C. Pay back wages and restore benefits lost by an employee as a consequence of the employer’s unfair business practice;

D. Bargain in good faith and return to bargaining table for 60 days; and

E. Post a notice for violating the Act for 60 days at the Company with a non-admissions clause

17. My office will attempt to get the NLRB charge dismissed or resolved without litigation.

HOW TO STAY NONUNION BY TEACHING YOUR EMPLOYEES HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT.

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 15:02:46 GMT

Monday, August 7, 2023

1 The U.S. labor movement has seen a resurgence in union activity in recent years.

2 In 2022, more than 16 million workers were represented by a union—an increase of 200,000 from 2021.

3 Union election petitions with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) increased by 53% during fiscal year 2022, the highest single-year increase since fiscal year 2016.

4. Further, unions saw their highest approval rating in more than 50 years.

5. In order to stay ahead of being organized, Employers should learn a five step formula called “PEACE” to teach their employees how to resolve conflict with management.

6. Once the employees learn how to resolve conflict with management, they will not go to third party, a union, to help them resolve their workplace problems.

NEW ELECTION PROCEDURES AT THE NLRB

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:59:47 GMT

November 6, 2023

1. On August 25, 2023, the Board issued a decision in Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC announcing a new framework for determining when employers are required to bargain with unions without a representation election.

2. The new framework will both effectuate employees’ right to bargain through representatives of their own choosing and improve the fairness and integrity of Board-conducted elections.

3. Under the new framework, when a union requests recognition on the basis that a majority of employees in an appropriate bargaining unit have designated the union as their representative, an employer must either recognize and bargain with the union or promptly file an RM petition seeking an election.

4. The NLRB had stated that this new election procedure takes place on December 26, 2023, but the NLRB is allowing a union to use this new procedure earlier.

5. However, if an employer who seeks an election commits any unfair labor practice that would require setting aside the election, the petition will be dismissed, and—rather than re-running the election—the Board will order the employer to recognize and bargain with the union.

6. You should note if the employer wins the first election, a union could file objections to the election stating that the union represented the majority of the employees. If the Employer stipulates to a second election with the union the NLRB might state the second stipulation is invalid and state the employer has to bargain with the union due to their unfair labor practices. However, the union has to prove there were unfair labor practices committed.

7. However, this determination to bargain with a union could take months or years to resolve at the NLRB if the employer goes to trial and files exceptions, etc. to any ALJ rulings.

THE NEW QUICKIE NLRB ELECTION RULES THAT GO INTO EFFECT ON DECEMBER 26, 2023

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:57:27 GMT

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

HOW TO PRACTICE BEFORE THE NLRB WHEN AN ELECTION PETITION IS FILED BY A UNION AGAINST YOUR COMPANY.

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:55:35 GMT

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

Amazon Violates the Act if they Retaliate Against Workers during an Election

Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:50:38 GMT

December 01, 2023

1. On November 21, 2023, Administrative Law Judge Lauren Esposito issued a decision finding that Amazon.com Services LLC (Amazon) violated the National Labor Relations Act by dismissing employees early, altering employees’ work assignments, and subjecting employees to closer supervision in retaliation for the employees’ support for the Amazon Labor Union (the Union), or for engaging in protected concerted activities.

2. The decision also found Amazon unlawfully interrogated employees, disparaged the Union by using appeals to racial prejudice and derogatory racial stereotyping, and prohibited employees from distributing Union literature and confiscating Union literature from employees.

3.Judge Esposito ordered Amazon to cease and desist from further unlawful activity and to make the adversely affected worker whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits including any other direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms and any adverse tax consequences. Amazon must also post copies of a Notice to Employees for 60 days at its JFK8 and DYY6 facilities on Staten Island, New York, and distribute the Notice to Employees electronically.

4.“Workers have the right to advocate collectively for a more equitable workplace — and it is unlawful for employers to prohibit or retaliate against them for doing so,” said NLRB Region 29 Director Teresa Poor. “I’m proud of the staff of Region 29 for diligently pursuing this significant case and litigating for strong, meaningful remedies.”

5.The Judge’s Decision and Order was issued based on a Complaint and Notice of Hearing issued by Kathy Drew King, former Regional Director of Region 29 of the NLRB. Field Attorneys Emily Cabrera and Matthew Jackson of the NLRB’s Region 29 represented General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo in proceedings before Judge Esposito.

Laborvision

design@coaxconsulting.com (Mai Raffiñan) — Sun, 10 Dec 2023 14:41:15 GMT

December 07, 2023

1. UAW trying to organize Volkswagen

DETROIT (AP) — More than 1,000 workers at Volkswagen's Tennessee factory have signed cards authorizing a vote on representation by the United Auto Workers, the first plant in the nation to reach that milestone in the UAW's quest to organize more than a dozen nonunion factories.

The union says in a statement Thursday that the VW workers signed on in less than a week.

The factory in Chattanooga employs about 3,800 people who make the VW ID.4 electric vehicle and the Atlas family of gas-powered SUVs. It could become the first test of the union's strategy to simultaneously try to organize the nonunion plants.

The UAW statement says workers have complained about mistreatment by management including mandatory overtime on Saturdays, and they are seeking higher pay. A message was left Thursday seeking comment from VW.

In November, VW gave workers an 11% pay raise at the plant. The raises came after UAW members ratified new contracts with Detroit automakers. The union says VW's pay lags behind what workers make at UAW-represented auto plants.

2. Washington Post has Walkout

More than 700 staffers at The Washington Post launched a 24-hour walkout Thursday after contract negotiations with the newspaper’s leadership have stalled after 18 months.

Reporters, producers, editors and business-side staffers walked off the job and began picketing outside the Post’s enigmatic downtown headquarters in the first protest action at the paper since the mid-1970s.

The Washington Post Guild, a member of the broader Washington-Baltimore NewsGuild, is accusing management of negotiating in “bad faith” as they seek to obtain a contract that they say must address pay disparities and offer employees raises and job protections as layoffs loom at the struggling storied paper.

3. A Former Employee at Airgas states his Termination was based on him having Cancer

An attorney for a former Airgas USA LLC employee with cancer will try to revive his lawsuit alleging his termination for a supposedly positive cannabis test was a pretext for disability discrimination.

4. During Strikes, 17% of LA Entertainment Workers Lost Jobs

It’s hard to measure the full impact of the Hollywood strikes — mainly because the TV and film industry will be facing the ripple effects for years to come — but a new study has revealed one significant immediate hit: 17% of Los Angeles-based showbiz workers lost their jobs during the work stoppages.

5.Fmr. Philadelphia labor leader John Dougherty convicted in embezzlement trial

Dougherty is accused of having embezzled more than $650,000 from electrician's union IBEW Local 98.

6. Yakima fruit grower fined after 2 workers die in tractor rollovers a month apart

#23-032

TUMWATER — A Yakima fruit grower and processor has been fined nearly $300,000 by the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) after two orchard workers died in tractor rollovers almost exactly a month apart.

7. More than 1100 DHL workers went on Strike

(WASHINGTON) – More than 1,100 DHL Express Teamsters at the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport (CVG) went on strike today to protest unfair labor practices and demand the company negotiate a fair contract.

rudnick

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-30-26

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-23-26

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-9-26

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 3-1-26

THE RUDNICK REPORT : NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 2-16-26

THE RUDNICK REPORT: NEW CASE DEVELPMENTS AT THE NLRB FOR 2-9-26

An Employer made Unilateral Changes to their Contract after Entering a Me-To Agreement with the Union.

3. Fields Fire Protection LLC

NEW POSSIBLE ELECTION DEVELOPMENTS FOR THE NLRB IN 2026

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

NLRB REGAINS QUORUM TO DECIDE APPEALS

THE RUDNICK REPORT: A WEEKLY UPDATE AT THE NLRB

THE RUDNICK REPORT: A WEEKLY UPDATE ON THE NLRB

THE RUDNICK REPORT: An Employer could Terminate an Employee for Wearing a BLM Pin which violated its Neutral Dress Code.

An Employer could Terminate an Employee for using a BLM pin on his Apron which violated the Company’s Policy for having a Neutral Dress Code.

4. If you need any assistance in determining what an employee can put on his uniform or any other human resource need, please contact Sanford Rudnick to respond to your health care union at 800-326-3046 or sandy@rudnickpro.com

THE RUDNICK REPORT: The NLRB ruled that Macy's Unlawfully Locked Out its Employees after a 3 Month Strike and Ordered Damages against Macy’s.

FOUR TYPES OF STRIKES ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE NLRB ACT

HOW TO PLAY HARDBALL WITH THE UNION

THE RUDNICK REPORT: EMPLOYER CONSIDERATIONS WHEN TERMINATING AN 8F UNION AGREEMENT

I. Background

2. Key Considerations for Transitioning to Non-Union

9. Recommended Employer Actions

15. Conclusion

THE RUDNICK REPORT: 4 factors to get an NLRB injunction

THE RUDNICK REPORT: Can an Employer use its management rights clause to implement cameras without union bargaining

THE RUDNICK REPORT: New NLRB Legal Developments for 9-15-25: A NEW NLRB STANDARD FOR SALTIING

New NLRB Updates for 9-2-25

New NLRB Updates for 8-25-25

New Case Deveopment's at the NLRB for 8-18-25

What are the Defenses of an Employer to Overcome a Union's claim it is an Alter Ego or Successor Employer

AN EMPLOYER HAS TO GIVE A UNION NOTICE OF A SHUTDOWN THAT IT WILL NOT NEGOTIATE A NEW AGREEMENT

NLRB UPDATES FOR 7-28-25 WEEKLY EMAIL

An Employer does not have to bargain with a union when Employer Files Objections, etc. to the election

NEW CASE DEVELOPMENTS AT THE NLRB ON JULY 14, 2025

An Explanation of the Right to Strike by a Union

What is the effect for an Employer who is a new purchaser of a company with a union contract in asset purchase or stock purchase

Employers can install Cameras into their trucks without bargaining with their union by using there "Management Rights Clause"

A Non Board NLRB Settlement can Eliminate years of Litigation for a Union and an Employer at the NLRB

The UFCW and the Teamster's Unions are organizing Employers in the Cannabis Industry

An Oral Agreement in Writing Can Modify the Finding of an Audit of a Trust Fund

WHEN IS IT LEGAL FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, ICE or HLS, TO ARREST AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT

An Employer can terminate an employee for taking PTO without the consent of the Employer

Can An Employer Require an Employee to Take a Covid Test.

H. Sanford Rudnick & Associates can win you case at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) or help you to Negotiate a Favorable Agreement.

Can a Whistle Blower/Employee get relief at the National ﻿ Labor Relations Board

An Employer that is not at Impasse in Negotiations cannot implement new terms and conditions

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

HOW CAN AN EMPLOYER RESOLVE HIS UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY WITH HIS UNION

CAN AN EMPLOYER REQUEST THE NLRB TO DISMISS AN ELECTION PETITION IF AN EMPLOYER IS CEASES HIS BUSINESS OPERATIONS WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER PETITION IS FILED?

HOW TO RESOLVE AN EMPLOYER'S UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY (UPL)

How much Notice does a Union have to Give before they Strike.

ELECTION CAMPAIGNING WITH A VIDEO AND A WEBSITE ABOUT THE IBEW UNION

Election campaigning with a Video and a Website about ﻿the Unite Here Union

Election campaigning with a Video and a Website

IF EMPLOYERS LEARN HOW TO RESOLVE CONFLICT IT WILL KEEP THEM NONUNION

Sanford Rudnick, Author, Conflict Resolution Coach

and Instructor

Six Reasons for Employees to Vote Against a Union in an NLRB Election.

AN EMPLOYER CAN HOLD MEETINGS WITH THEIR EMPLOYEES IN AN ELECTION AS LONG AS THE MEETINGS ARE VOLUNTARY

An Employer cannot Threaten or Discharge an Employee during a Strike.

AN EMPLOYER CAN CONTINUE WITH THEIR ELECTION CAMPAIGN AFTER MAIL BALLOTS ARE SENT OUT TO THEIR EMPLOYEES

DOES A NEW CONTRACTOR WHO WINS A NEW FEDERAL JOB HAVE TO ASSUME THE PREDECESSOR UNION CONTRACT

EMPLOYERS CANNOT SEND TEXTS IN AN ELECTION THAT INTERROGATE OR THREATEN EMPLOYEES

NLRB is seeking to order Trader Joes to reopen its ﻿ New York location during an Organizing Drive

An Employer that Hires Employees from an Employer that Goes Out of Business is not a Successor Employer

HOW TO QUICKLY RESOLVE ANY CONFLICT USING THE 5 LETTERS OF PEACE

CALIFORNIA BANS CAPTIVE AUDIENCE MEETING DURING AN ELECTION

IF A UNION ALLOWS AN EMPLOYER TO CONTINUE TO PAY ITS WORKERS FAIR WAGES AND BENEFITS IT WILL OBTAIN A CONTRACT

THE NLRB IS SEEKING A BARGAINING ORDER AGAINST TRADER JOES AFTER AN ELECTION

AN EMPLOYER CANNOT THREATEN EMPLOYEES WITH A TEXT DURING AN ELECTION

AN EMPLOYER GENERALLY SHOULD NOT DISCHARGE AN EMPLOYEE DURING A UNION ELECTION CAMPAIGN

TEACH YOUR WORKERS A FORMULA TO OVERCOME REJECTION

An oral agreement can modify the finding of a audit of a Trust Fund

AN EMPLOYER IN AN ELECTION CANNOT SOLICIT BENEFITS OR THREATEN EMPLOYEES WITH LOSS OF BENEFITS

Can a Whistle Blower/Employee get relief at the National Labor Relations Board

Election campaigning with a Video and a Website about the Unite Here Union

NLRB is seeking to order Trader Joes to reopen its New York location during an Organizing Drive

and Instructor