Search form

Labor Board Toughens Standard for Employers Seeking to Withdraw Union Recognition

By Howard M. Bloom and Patrick L. Egan
  • February 19, 2002

The National Labor Relations Board recently made it more difficult for employers of the approximately nine percent of private sector unionized employees to become union free. Altering long-standing law, the Labor Board redefined the circumstances in which an employer lawfully may withdraw recognition from a union based on the employer's belief the union no longer has the support of a majority of the employees it represents. Levitz Furniture Co. of the Pacific, Inc., 333 NLRB No. 105 (March 29, 2001).

Pre-existing law required only that employers have a "good faith doubt" based on objective factors about a union's continuing support among a majority of the members of the bargaining unit. This "good faith doubt" standard had been interpreted to require only that an employer have a reasonable uncertainty about the employees' majority support. Reliable statements by employees were considered to be reasonable evidence indicating the lack of majority support for the union.

In Levitz, the Labor Board changed the "good faith doubt" standard and now requires that an employer prove the union actually has lost majority support. This means that rather than "believe" the union has lost majority support, the employer actually must prove it.

In a recent NLRB memorandum, the Labor Board's General Counsel instructed attorneys in the NLRB's regional offices that "actual loss" could be established by "employees' firsthand statements regarding their own personal favor or opposition to the incumbent union, or an anti-union petition signed by a majority of unit employees." "Actual loss" also may be shown by "employees' and supervisors' statements regarding other employees' union sentiments." The General Counsel indicated that, where the evidence of "actual loss" is established solely or in part by statements by employees or supervisors regarding other employees' union sentiments, the General Counsel will give the case an added level of scrutiny. For employers, it is clear from the memorandum the preferred method of proving "actual loss" is by means of an anti-union petition.

Generally, when an employer has a collective bargaining agreement with a union representing the employees, the employer may not lawfully withdraw recognition until after the contract expires. Where an employer and a union are bargaining for a "first" contract, a withdrawal of recognition may not occur until after one year has passed from the date the union was certified as the employees' bargaining representative. Although the Labor Board now has made it more difficult for employers to show the absence of majority support, withdrawal of recognition is still a viable option where employees have expressed a desire to become union-free.

©2002 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

November 26, 2019

Democratic Bill Seeks to Classify Graduate Student Workers as Employees under NLRA

November 26, 2019

The “Respect Graduate Student Workers Act,” introduced by Representative Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), aims to classify graduate student workers as employees and ensure them “full labor protections” under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The bill also seeks to prohibit the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from finalizing its... Read More

November 15, 2019

Top Five Labor Law Developments for October 2019

November 15, 2019

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has clarified its standard for evaluating the legality of employers’ facially neutral policies, rules, or handbook provisions. LA Specialty Produce Co., 368 NLRB No. 93 (Oct. 8, 2019). Overturning the Obama-NLRB standard, the NLRB in Boeing Co. provided a roadmap for how it will analyze the... Read More

October 25, 2019

Labor Board Clarifies Boeing Work Rules Decision, Finds Confidentiality, Media Contact Rules Lawful

October 25, 2019

An employer’s confidentiality and non-disclosure rule and media contact rule do not violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has held. LA Specialty Produce Company, 368 NLRB No. 93 (2019). The Board also substantially clarified its decision in Boeing Co., 365 NLRB No. 154 (Dec. 15, 2017... Read More

Related Practices