Search form

Labor Board Subpoenas Allowed before OSHA Consultation

By Bradford T. Hammock
  • February 16, 2016

A divided National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled that a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between NLRB and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration over OSHA-related issues does not require NLRB’s General Counsel to consult with OSHA before issuing investigative subpoenas.

Representatives of a manufacturing facility in Alabama had petitioned NLRB either to issue protective orders or to revoke subpoenas issued by an NLRB regional director, acting on behalf of the agency’s General Counsel, for documents or other items related to two alleged unfair labor practices. The company contended that a 1975 NLRB-OSHA MOU required NLRB to defer action until the agency first conferred with OSHA when the complaints relate to matters associated with OSHA’s governing statute (Section 11(c)).

Both OSHA and NLRB have mandates to address employee safety concerns. Section 11(c) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act prohibits firing or discriminating against an employee for exercising rights under the OSH Act. The National Labor Relations Act prohibits retaliation against employees who have engaged in union activity or protected concerted activities related to employees’ safety concerns. The purpose of the MOU is to prevent duplicative litigation before the two agencies when complaints involve similar safety issues.

In denying the petition, Board members Kent Y. Hirozawa and Lauren McFerran acknowledged that the MOU calls for deferral or dismissal where a charge filed with the General Counsel and a complaint brought to OSHA both involve Section 11(c) issues. But, they added, “[W]e find that the MOU does not require the Region to determine whether to defer or dismiss such charges, or engage in consultations with the Solicitor of Labor concerning deferral or dismissal, without having investigated the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegations.”

The Board’s decision indicates that an employer cannot block an NLRB investigation of an alleged unfair labor practice even if the employer correctly surmises the agency will defer action in a dispute to OSHA.

Employers should consult with counsel to determine whether and how their particular controversies may be affected by this decision.

©2016 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

November 16, 2017

Transportation Department Expands Drug Testing Panel to Include Certain ‘Semi-Synthetic’ Opioids

November 16, 2017

Employers regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) should revise their drug and alcohol testing policies to conform to new DOT regulations that added four “semi-synthetic” opioid drugs to the DOT drug testing panel. The new regulations go into effect on January 1, 2018. DOT announced in a rule published in the Federal... Read More

November 15, 2017

Top Five Labor Law Developments for October 2017

November 15, 2017

Home health aides who successfully objected to the collection of “fair share” fees without their consent may not proceed as a class, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, has ruled, affirming a lower court’s determination. Riffey v. Rauner, No. 16-3487 (7th Cir. Oct. 11, 2017). The home health aides... Read More

November 3, 2017

What Did National Labor Relations Board General Counsel Richard Griffin’s Term Mean for Employers?

November 3, 2017

Richard F. Griffin, Jr.’s term as National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel (GC) was marked by a dogged defense and pursuit of bolstering the rights of unions and employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). Griffin, a former general counsel for the International Union of Operating Engineers, was the NLRB GC... Read More