Information contained in this publication is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or opinion, nor is it a substitute for the professional judgment of an attorney.
The inclusion of Weingarten rights on the back cover of collective bargaining agreements is a longstanding practice followed by many unions. But a complaint (pdf) recently issued by the NLRB calls into question the legality of that practice if the union acts unilaterally.
Region 31 of the NLRB filed the complaint against the California Nurses Association, alleging that CNA violated Section 8(b)(1)(B) of the NLRA by unilaterally adding the Weingarten rights language to the printed copies of its collective bargaining agreement with Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital.
Following the conclusion of negotiations between CNA and the Valencia, California-based hospital, the parties agreed that CNA would print copies of the contract. The parties had not, however, reached any agreement regarding the inclusion of Weingarten rights language. After CNA printed the contracts with the Weingarten rights included, the hospital filed an unfair labor practice charge. Region 31 investigated the charge and found reasonable cause to believe CNA had violated the NLRA, triggering the filing of the complaint. The matter has been set for a hearing before an administrative law judge on August 1, 2011.
So-called “Weingarten rights” refer to the protections offered to bargaining unit employees by virtue of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in NLRB v. J. Weingarten, Inc., 420 US 251 (1975). In that case, the Supreme Court established that bargaining unit employees have a right to have a representative present at an investigatory meeting that the employee reasonably believes could lead to discipline.
Many unions favor publishing Weingarten rights in bold, enlarged letters on the back cover of collective bargaining agreements to highlight the importance of the right to representation. Their ability to continue this practice in the future, without obtaining the consent of the employer, will likely hinge on the resolution of the complaint recently filed against CNA.
This entry was written by Brady Mitchell.
photo credit: peepo