In NLRB v. Pier Sixty, LLC, the Second Circuit held that an employee’s expletive-laden Facebook post – which hurled vulgar attacks at his manager, his manager’s mother and his family – did not result in the employee losing the protection of the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”). But even though the Second Circuit conferred protected status on this unquestionably obscene post, it did not create a protected right to level profane verbal assaults on management when discussing union business. Such conduct has been, and will continue to be, unprotected in most ...
In a recent decision involving social media posts by non-union employees, as well as employer rules prohibiting the sharing of information about compensation among co-workers and with non-employees, the NLRB affirmed the findings and proposed remedy recommended by a Board Administrative Law Judge, holding that the Facebook posts of three employees of an upscale clothing boutique in San Francisco constituted protected activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act and the termination of the employees’ for the posts was an ...
In one of the first rulings by the NLRB in a case involving social media, the Board agreed with the order of the ALJ that the firing of an employee for certain Facebook posts were not protected, concerted activity under the NLRA and the termination did not violate Section 7 of the Act. Karl Knauz Motors, Inc. (PDF)
The employee was a salesman who worked for a BMW dealership in Lake Bluff, Illinois. He posted several pictures and comments on his Facebook page about two recent events concerning his employer. First, the employee complained about the refreshments ...
- Fifth Circuit Redresses NLRB’s Tesla Decision but the Board Remains Undaunted
- New York State Bans Workplace “Captive Audience” Meetings
- Federal Government Continues Initiatives to Limit Employer Opposition to Union Organizing
- NLRB Issues Final Rule on Joint-Employer Status, Answering a Major Question No One Asked
- NLRB Delivers Labor Day Gifts to Unions