Wyatt Employment Law Report

NLRB Reverts to Prior Standard for Implementing Unilateral Changes

Leave a comment

By Mitzi Wyrick

In Raytheon Network Centric Systems, 365 NLRB No. 161, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) issued a ruling affecting bargaining obligations that are required before implementing a unilateral “change” in employment matters. Until 2016, when the NLRB decided E.I. du Pont de Nemours, 364 NLRB No. 113, the NLRB had found that an employer was not obligated to bargain before making unilateral changes when it followed a well-established past practice.

In the 2016 DuPont decision, the NLRB held that even if an employer acted consistently with past practice, if a collective bargaining agreement  (“CBA”) had expired and was no longer in effect, bargaining would always be required.  Specifically, the NLRB had required the employer to provide the union with notice and an opportunity to bargain prior to implementing any changes if the past practice was created under a management rights clause in a CBA that had expired or if the disputed actions involved employer discretion.

In Raytheon, the CBA expired.  Raytheon implemented changes to its health plan, making annual modifications to its benefits and costs as it had done in the past.  Following DuPont, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) held that Raytheon was obligated to bargain before making those changes.  The NLRB reversed and, in the process, overruled DuPont, reverting to its previous test for implementation of unilateral changes.  The NLRB held that actions did not constitute a change if they were similar in kind and degree with an established past practice consisting of comparable unilateral actions. Actions consistent with an established practice do not constitute a change requiring bargaining merely because they may involve some degree of discretion.

Leave a reply. Please note that although this blog may be helpful in informing clients and others who have an interest in information privacy and security, it is not intended to be legal advice. The information on this blog also should not be relied upon to form an attorney-client relationship.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s