In a previous article, we emphasized the potential impact of the recent Supreme Court decisions in Loper and Jarkesy on the future landscape of labor and employment law: imagine a world in which administrative agencies can no longer pursue adjudication in their own administrative tribunals, and in which the agencies’ interpretation of the statues they enforce are no longer entitled to deference. As it happens, this impact is already being felt in the labor law world: in Starbucks v. McKinney, the Supreme Court held that the National Labor Relations Board doesn’t get any special privileges when it comes to seeking injunctions against employers.
Starbucks v. McKinney
Loper threw out the Court’s long-standing “Chevron deference” doctrine and Jarskesy, while applies only to the SEC and the particular enforcement proceeding at issue in that case, logically applies to any administrative proceeding before any federal agency empowered to issue fines. Starbucks v. McKinney takes this a step further. There, the Supreme Court clarified that the Board is subject to the same four-factor test used for any court ordered action when seeking injunctions under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
After several Starbucks employees announced plans to unionize, they invited a news crew from a local television station to visit the store after hours to promote their unionizing effort. Starbucks fired multiple employees involved with the media event for violating company...
The Justice Department has fired back at the Southern Poverty Law Center after it filed an injunction against Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for saying the group didn’t share information from...