Good news: NLRB finds employer’s at-will policy passes muster
By now, you’re sadly familiar with the National Labor Relations Board’s efforts to poke their nose into employee handbooks — probing company policies on such things as social media use, email and even your at-will statements. But the NLRB recently greenlighted a Washington State company’s at-will provisions, providing other firms with an example to follow.
The case involved Lionbridge Technologies, an internet technology services provider in Redmond, WA. The firm’s at-will policy was challenged by a labor union, which claimed that the policy deterred employees from exercising their rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.
Section 7 outlines employees’ rights to freely discuss workplace issues such as salaries, management actions, workplace conditions — all discussions that could lead to a push to organize a union.
Some lawyerly advice: Dismiss
Lionbridge’s policy, which is contained in its employee handbook:
Employment at the Employer is on an at-will basis unless otherwise stated in a written individual employment agreement signed by the Senior Vice President of Human Resources. This means that employment may be terminated by the employee or the Employer at any time, for any reason or for no reason, and with or without prior notice.
No one has the authority to make any express or implied representations in connection with, or in any way limit, an employee’s right to resign or the Employer’s right to terminate an employee at any time, for any reason or for no reason, with or without prior notice. Nothing in this handbook creates an employment agreement, express or implied, or any other agreement between any employee and the Employer.
No statement, act, series of events or pattern of conduct can change this at-will relationship.
The case was reviewed by the NLRB’s Division of Advice and a memo was issued by associate general counsel Barry Kearney.
Here’s the upshot of what Kearney had to say, courtesy of Jackson Lewis, the law firm that represented Lionbridge:
Kearney concluded that the policy did not explicitly restrict Section 7 rights, wasn’t established in response to union activity, and wasn’t applied unlawfully. But the question remained: Could employees reasonably construe the policy as prohibiting them from organizing a union?
Kearney said no. The reasons:
- the clause stating that only the senior vice president of Human Resources could change an employee’s at-will status would not lead employees to believe it would be futile to attempt to organize to change their at-will status, and
- the provision that read, “No statement, act, series of events or patterns of conduct can change this at-will relationship” was not a work rule directed at employee conduct, did not threaten discipline for attempting to change at-will status and, most important, did not require employees to agree that their at-will status could never be changed.
Kearney recommended that the Labor Board dismiss the case.
This isn’t the first time the NLRB has put its stamp of approval on firms’ at will policies. Check out our post from a couple of years ago for more examples of what the Labor Board finds acceptable.
Resources
Post Your Resume to 65+ Job Sites
Resume Service
