Lyle Denniston looks at a recent Court of Appeals ruling that bars the National Labor Relations Board from forcing employers to publicly list employees union rights in the form of a poster.

The poster rule is a prime example of a government agency that seeks to fundamentally change the way employers and employees communicate. The ultimate result of the NLRBs intrusion would be to create hostile work environments where none exist.

Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, in a statement quoted in The New York Times May 8 in response to a federal appeals court decision striking down a requirement by the National Labor Relations Board that some 6 million companies display in their workplaces a poster telling workers of their rights to unionize.

In todays workplace, employers are required to display posters explaining wage and hour rights, health and safety and discrimination laws, even emergency escape routes. The circuit courts rulings suggests that courts should strike down hundreds of notice requirements, not only those that inform workers about their rights and warn them of hazards, but also those on cigarette packages, in home mortgages, and many other areas.

Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO labor union federation, in a statement quoted in the same The New York Times article May 8.

checkFor generations, the First Amendments Free Speech Clause has been a battleground between companies and labor unions over how they communicate with workers about the issue of joining a union to bargain over workplace benefits. Recently, in the background of that struggle has been the reality that labor unions are continually losing popularity. In January, government figures showed that the rate of union membership in the U.S. was at its lowest level since 1916, and the decline is especially severe in private sector workplaces.

That trend, in fact, was a key factor in the National Labor Relations Boards decision in 2011 to require employers whose dealings with employees are governed by the federal labor law that dates back to 1935 to put up an 11-by-17-inch poster telling workers about their rights. Declining union membership, the board found, was due in part to the fact that workers did not know their rights, and so should be told about them and told how to enforce those rights.

The boards poster rule told workers that they had a right to form, join, or assist a labor union, a right to bargain collectively through a union, a right to discuss workplace benefits and conditions with other workers and with a union, a right to take action to improve working conditions, a right to strike and picket, and a right to choose not to engage in any of those activities.

The fight over that rule is a modern-day echo of past disputes arising out of NLRB attempts to police the workplace, when management associations complained in the courts and to Congress that the board had pushed the labor relations balance too far in favor of unions, as the Supreme Court described those complaints in a ruling five years ago.

That decision, in fact, noted that the Supreme Court as long ago as 1941 had recognized the First Amendment right of employers to engage in non-coercive speech about unionization. In other words, they were free to talk to their employees in ways that sought to discourage them from joining unions, so long as that was done without threats of reprisal or coercion. Congress, in fact, wrote that guarantee of employer free speech into labor law in 1947, in what is called the Taft-Hartley Act.

Continue reading here:
Constitution Check: Who has First Amendment rights in the workplace?