Hendrickson United States, LLC. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

932 F.3d 465 (2019) United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2019-08-01

Employer review petition and Board cross-enforcement; court rejects coercion findings concerning bargaining-from-scratch and relationship predictions. (result: claimant-lost)

Facts

  1. 3 Interference, restraint or coercion not no-evidence
    The phrase is coercive if used to "indicate that the employer will adopt a regressive bargaining stance or lowered benefits to penalize workers for unionization," and it must be "viewed in the context of other statements or actions by the employer."
  2. 3 Interference, restraint or coercion not no-evidence
    The Company and any recognized Union would begin the negotiating process from scratch.
  3. 3 Interference, restraint or coercion not no-evidence
    Despite the deference we owe to the Board's expertise in labor matters, we find that the Board's conclusion is not supported even by substantial evidence.
  4. 3 Interference, restraint or coercion not no-evidence
    The company makes clear that its statement is meant to counter any ideas that union representation would automatically lead to an increase in compensation, and that purpose is explicitly allowed under Board precedent.