[co-author: Makenzie Way]
As we have discussed before, several years ago, the Board instituted a significant paradigm shift in analyzing the lawfulness of employers’ handbook policies in relation to employees’ Section 7 rights, when it issued its decision in
Boeing established a balancing test that takes into account the employer’s legitimate business interest for the policy at issue, and the nature and extent of the potential impact on NLRA rights. The new framework discarded the previous test of whether employees “would reasonably” construe the language to prohibit protected, concerted activity.
Since
Boeing, the NLRB General Counsel issued an Advice Memorandum providing extensive guidance regarding the three categories of employment rules, policies and handbook provisions the Board would consider as part of the balancing test, and the Board has issued a number of decisions analyzing employer handbook policies with this in mind (which we have discussed here, here a
Thursday, January 14, 2021
As we have discussed before, several years ago, the Board instituted a significant paradigm shift in analyzing the lawfulness of employers’ handbook policies in relation to employees’ Section 7 rights, when it issued its decision in
Boeing established a balancing test that takes into account the employer’s legitimate business interest for the policy at issue, and the nature and extent of the potential impact on NLRA rights. The new framework discarded the previous test of whether employees “would reasonably” construe the language to prohibit protected, concerted activity.
Since
Boeing, the NLRB General Counsel issued an Advice Memorandum providing extensive guidance regarding the three categories of employment rules, policies and handbook provisions the Board would consider as part of the balancing test, and the Board has issued a number of decisions analyzing employer handbook policies with this in mind (which we have disc