The National Telephone standard was not designed to assess whether employer-sought subpoenas, issued by the Board, “interfere with, restrain, or coerce” employees’ exercise of their Section 7 rights.
In an unfair labor practice proceeding, the NLRB applied the wrong legal standard in concluding that Starbucks Corp. violated Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA by successfully obtaining Board-issued subpoenas seeking information protected by Section 7, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Rather than evaluating whether the employer’s conduct would tend to be coercive under “the totality of the circumstances,” the Board treated National Telephone Directory Corp.—which enunciates a discovery rule governing when subpoenas should be quashed—as dispositive of liability. Because the Board considered the case under the incorrect standard, the Fifth Circuit vacated the Board’s order and remanded for further proceedings (Starbucks Corp. v. NLRB, No. 24-60500 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2026)).
ULP proceedings. The case stemmed from an earlier NLRB unfair labor practice (ULP) proceeding concerning Starbucks’ La Quinta, California store. In December 2021, employees there began a union organizing campaign. Two shift supervisors joined the union organizing committee and openly supported unionization. Workers United ultimately won the election for certification as the bargaining representative. In May 2022, the union filed charges alleging unlawful conduct by Starbucks during the...
By Victor Ahiuma-Young The National Pension Commission (PenCom) has introduced stricter advertising rules for Pension Fund Administrators, PFAs, warning operators against false claims, misleading ...