2023 Statutory Appendix and Case Supplement to Cox, Bok & Gormanā s Labor Law, Cases and Materials, 17th (University Casebook Series)

Matthew Finkin; Timothy Glynn

ISBN 10: 1685619991 / ISBN 13: 9781685619992

Published by Foundation Press, 2023

About this Item

May have limited writing in cover pages. Pages are unmarked. ~ ThriftBooks: Read More, Spend Less.

Seller Inventory # G1685619991I4N00

Bibliographic Details

• Title: 2023 Statutory Appendix and Case Supplement to Cox, Bok & Gormanā s Labor Law, Cases and Materials, 17th (University Casebook Series)
• Publisher: Foundation Press
• Publication Date: 2023
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 1685619991
• ISBN 13: 9781685619992
• Binding: Paperback
• Condition: Very Good
• Dust Jacket Condition: No Jacket
• Weight: 0.73 pounds

About this title

Synopsis

The 2023 statutory and case supplement not only contains all relevant statutory provisions but also highlights and summarizes significant developments since the publication of the 17th edition of the casebook, including:

• The Board’s decision in The Atlanta Opera, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 95 (2023), overruling SuperShuttle and returning to the standard set for in its 2014 FedEx Home Delivery decision for determining the independent contractor status
• Updates on and problems addressing union organizing activities at Amazon facilities
• The Board’s decision in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (2023), returning to prior precedent holding that employers may not offer employees severance agreements that require the employees to broadly waive their Section 7 rights
• The Board’s invitation for briefs in Stericycle, Inc., 371 NLRB No. 48 (2021), on whether the Board should alter the work rules standard adopted in The Boeing Company
• The Supreme Court’s decision in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 141 S. Ct. 2063 (2021), holding unconstitutional California’s Agricultural Labor Relations Act’s right to access by union organizers
• The Board’s decision in Thryv, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 22 (2022), holding that “make whole” relief should address all direct or foreseeable pecuniary harms to employees as a result of an employer’s unfair labor practices, and its decision in Noah’s Ark Processors, LLC, 372 NLRB No. 80 (2023), detailing potential remedies when an employer has shown repeated or egregious disregard for employees’ rights
• The Board’s purposed “Fair Choice and Employee Voice Rule,” addressing election-blocking charges, voluntary recognition, and construction industry bargaining relationships
• The Supreme Court’s decision in Glacier Northwest, Inc. v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 143 S. Ct. 1404 (2023), holding that the NLRA does not “arguably protect” the union’s conduct or preempt the employer’s state law tort claims against the union when striking drivers ceased of work while the employer’s trucks were full of concrete and failed to take reasonable precautions to protect the employer’s property
• The Board’s notice that it will engage in rulemaking on the standard for determining joint employment
• The Board’s decision in Lion Elastomers LLC, 372 NLRB No. 83 (2023), overturning Board’s prior decision in General Motors and returning to the “setting-specific” standards approach in situations in which employees are disciplined or discharged for misconduct that occurs during activity otherwise protected by Section 7
• A number of General Counsel Abruzzo’s important memoranda and arguments in briefs, including:
  • Memorandum GC 21–04, setting out a long list of cases and subject matter areas that would be subject to the Office’s “initiative” for change
  • Memorandum GC 21–08, stating that scholarship football players at Northwestern University and those similarly situated are employees with Section 7 rights
  • Memorandum GC 22–04 and briefing in CEMEX Construction Materials Pacific LLC, 28–CA–230115 advocating that the Board abandon its toleration of “captive audience” meetings and proposing new safeguards for Section 7 rights and also urging that the Board reinstate the Joy Silk doctrine
  • Memorandum GC 23-08 setting forth Counsel’s view that, except in limited circumstances, noncompete provisions in employment contracts and severance agreements violate Section 7 because they chill employees from exercising their rights to take collective action to improve their working conditions
• New Problems for Discussion throughout the text based on other recent judicial and Board developments