Summary of NLRB Decisions for Week of February 24 - 28, 2025
The Summary of NLRB Decisions is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to substitute for the opinions of the NLRB. Inquiries should be directed to the Office of the Executive Secretary at 202‑273‑1940.
Summarized Board Decisions
No Published Board Decisions Issued.
***
Unpublished Board Decisions in Representation and Unfair Labor Practice Cases
R Cases
No Unpublished R Cases Issued.
Cases
No Unpublished C Cases Issued.
***
Appellate Court Decisions
Stein, Inc., Board Case No. 09-CA-214633 (reported at 369 NLRB Nos. 10 and 11) (D.C. Cir. Feb. 28, 2025).
In an unpublished judgment, which covered two proceedings consolidated for review, the D.C. Circuit remanded the cases to the Board for further proceedings. Both Board orders under review involved allegations of unfair labor practices that arose after Stein took over certain operations at AK Steel, where the employees working there were represented in three different units by three unions: International Union of Operating Engineers Local 18; Truck Drivers, Chauffeurs, and Helpers, Local Union No. 100, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; and Laborers’ International Union of North America, Local 534. Before Stein started operations at AK Steel, however, it negotiated a collective-bargaining agreement with the Operating Engineers that covered all three units of employees and included a union-security provision requiring employees to join the union and pay dues.
The Board (Chairman Ring, then-Member Kaplan and Member Emanuel) found that the three decades-old historic units remained appropriate, and that therefore it was unlawful for Stein and the Operating Engineers to determine for themselves that the units should be merged into one represented by the Operating Engineers. The Board found that Stein engaged in numerous violations of Section 8(a)(1), (2), (3), and (5), and that, in turn, the Operating Engineers violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) and (2). Foremost among those violations, the Board concluded that Stein unlawfully recognized the Operating Engineers as the representative of employees in the units represented by the Teamsters and the Laborers, entered into a collective-bargaining agreement covering those units, and maintained and enforced that agreement. Among the violations committed by the Operating Engineers, the Board found that it unlawfully accepted recognition from Stein as the representative of employees in the units represented by the Teamsters and Laborers.
On review, the Court held that the Board did not reasonably explain its conclusion that the historic bargaining units remained appropriate. The Board’s analysis, the Court stated, which compared circumstances before and after Stein took over the contract, was insufficient to support its conclusion that the historic bargaining units remained appropriate. The Court cited in-circuit precedent holding that the Board cannot maintain historic bargaining structures based on a “purely comparative inquiry,” citing Deferiet Paper Co. v. NLRB, 235 F.3d 581 (D.C. Cir. 2000). Accordingly, the Court remanded the cases to the Board, but in doing so, noted that it “do[es] not prejudge whether the historic bargaining units here are appropriate,” and “hold only that the Board did not reasonably explain its conclusion.”
The Court’s judgment is here.
***
Administrative Law Judge Decisions
American Backflow & Fire Prevention, Inc. (13-CA-285856, et al.; JD-15-25) Wauconda, IL. Administrative Law Judge G. Rebekah Ramirez issued her decision on February 27, 2025. Charges filed by Plumbers Local 130, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO and Sprinkler Fitters Local 281, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO.
Starbucks Corporation (01-CA-302321, et al.; JD-16-25) Seattle, WA. Administrative Law Judge Kimberly Sorg-Graves issued her decision on February 27, 2025. Charges filed by Workers United Labor Union International, a/w Service Employees International Union.
HSCGP, LLC, d/b/a Trios Healthcare (19-CA-321939; JD(SF)-04-25) Kennewick, WA. Administrative Law Judge Mara-Louise Anzalone issued her decision on February 27, 2025. Charge filed by Office and Professional Employees’ International Union Local 8.
Sutter Valley Hospitals, d/b/a Sutter Solano Medical Center (20-CA-295261, et al.; JD-17-25) Sacramento, CA. Administrative Law Judge Andrew S. Gollin issued his decision on February 28, 2025. Charges filed by California Nurses Association and Caregivers and Healthcare Employees Union.
***
To have the NLRB’s Weekly Summary of Cases delivered to your inbox each week, please subscribe here.