Blue Man Vegas, LLC v. NLRB

Last updated
Blue Man Vegas, LLC v. NLRB
District of Columbia Court of Appeals Seal.svg
Court United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Full case nameBLUE MAN VEGAS, LLC, Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, its Territories, Canada, Local 720, AFL-CIO, Intervenor.
DecidedJune 10, 2008 (2008-06-10)
Citation(s)529 F. 3d 417 (D.C. Cir. 2008)
Transcript(s) FindLaw
Case opinions
(1) NLRB correctly applied "overwhelming community of interest" standard; (2) NLRB decision was supported by substantial evidence; and (3) NLRB decision did not create "disfavored residual unit."
Decision by Douglas H. Ginsburg

Blue Man Vegas, LLC v. NLRB (529 F. 3d 417 (D.C. Cir. 2008), [1] was a case of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in which it held on whether the National Labor Relations Board had erred in its holding the bargaining unit proposed by the union was appropriate. The National Labor Relations Board had previously decided that Blue Man Vegas, LLC had engaged in unfair labor practices under the terms of the National Labor Relations Act through its refusing to bargain with the established union, which served as the bargaining representative.

Contents

Background, Procedural Posture, and Arguments

Blue Man Vegas, LLC. served as the parent company and managing entity of the Las Vegas iteration of the Blue Man Group stage show. Apart from the eponymous blue men, which head the live show, the production was aided by professional musicians, and a stage crew, which was divided into several constituent departments. Most relevant to the case at hand are the professionals known as musical instrument technicians (MITs), who were responsible for maintaining the live instruments used by the Blue Men during the production, several of which are unique to the production itself.

From 2000 to mid-2005, Blue Man Vegas was resident and performing at the Luxor Hotel and Casino. While at the Luxor, Blue Man Vegas employed the MITs directly, with the Luxor employing members of other stage crews, with which it entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Union. Because of these differences in employment, there were resultant differences in the terms of employment between the MITs and members of the Luxor-employed stage crews. Among these were the practice of the MITs reporting to a representative of Blue Man Vegas, while the other stage crews reported to the Luxor; the status of the MITs as salaried employees where the others were paid an hourly wage, and a separate pre-performance sheet specifically for the MITs.

In September 2005, Blue Man Vegas moved from the Luxor to a new venue at the Venetian Hotel and Casino. Following the move, Blue Man Vegas also transitioned to employing the stage crew members directly. Differences remained among the terms of employment among the MITs and stage crew employees, the most salient of which involved the payment of a salary for those MITs who had been with the company at the Luxor, while the stage crew members were still paid under an hourly wage.

In March 2006, the labor union petitioned the National Labor Relations Board for its overseeing a representation election regarding the installation of a union composed of all of the stage crew employees with the exception of the MITs. Blue Man Vegas objected to this configuration, arguing that the MITs should also be included in the bargaining unit. In response to these respective arguments, the National Labor Relations Board's regional director, pursuant to §9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, [2] that the unit as proposed by the Union was appropriate and compelled the representation election. The Board denied a subsequent motion by Blue Man Vegas for review of the Regional Director's decision.

The Union won the resulting representation election, with the regional director certifying the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative. In the month following the election, the Labor Board's regional director issued a complaint against Blue Man Vegas which alleged that the company had refused to bargain with the Union, breaching the duty to bargain in good faith in violation of §§8(a)(1) and 5 of the National Labor Relations Act. [3] Blue Man Vegas conversely argued that it was not required to bargain with the union as the exclusion of the MITs within the unit made the union inappropriate. The Board issued summary judgment for the General Counsel, finding that Blue Man Vegas had or could have raised all representation issues prior to the union determination and certification by the Board and that Blue Man Vegas did not submit evidence previously unavailable to the involved parties. Blue Man Vegas petitioned the D.C. Circuit Court for review, with the National Labor Relations Board cross-appealing for enforcement of its prior decision.

Analysis and Holding

Blue Man Vegas submitted three arguments for the court's analysis: (1) The Board applied the wrong standard to determine whether the proposed unit was appropriate; (2) the unit determination was not supported by substantial evidence; and (3) the exclusion of the MITs from the proposed unit created a "disfavored residual unit." [4] [5]

Ginsburg writes in his opinion for the court that the Labor Board is primarily concerned with whether the employees within a proposed bargaining unit are members of a subjective "community of interest", and thus bargaining unit determinations should be made on a case-by-case basis, using the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act as a guide. With respect to this standard, the decisions of the National Labor Relations Board generally rely on a loose prima facie standard of appropriateness. The employer has a resultant and corresponding burden to show that said bargaining unit is "truly inappropriate," which may mean, for example, that there exists no legitimate reasoning for excluding certain individual or a class of employees from it. That is, if the excluded employees share a reasonable community of interest with included employees, there exists no legitimate reason for excluding them from the bargaining unit.

Blue Man Vegas asserted that the Labor Board applied an incorrect standard in making its unit determination, effectively "accord[ing] controlling weight to the Union's extent of organization,", [6] which would violate §9(c)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act. [7] Relying on the aforementioned Community of Interest standard, and on a prior Board decision in Lundy Packing Co. (Lundy I), 314 N.L.R.B. 1042, 1043-44 (1994), [8] Blue Man Vegas suggested that the Community of Interest Standard itself "unlawfully gives controlling weight to the union's extent of organization."

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Labor Relations Act of 1935</span> 1935 U.S. federal labor law regulating the rights of workers and unions

The National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act, is a foundational statute of United States labor law that guarantees the right of private sector employees to organize into trade unions, engage in collective bargaining, and take collective action such as strikes. Central to the act was a ban on company unions. The act was written by Senator Robert F. Wagner, passed by the 74th United States Congress, and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Taft–Hartley Act</span> 1947 U.S. federal law regulating labor unions

The Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, better known as the Taft–Hartley Act, is a United States federal law that restricts the activities and power of labor unions. It was enacted by the 80th United States Congress over the veto of President Harry S. Truman, becoming law on June 23, 1947.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Labor Relations Board</span> U.S. Federal Government agency responsible for enforcing certain labor laws

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is an independent agency of the federal government of the United States with responsibilities for enforcing U.S. labor law in relation to collective bargaining and unfair labor practices. Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 it supervises elections for labor union representation and can investigate and remedy unfair labor practices. Unfair labor practices may involve union-related situations or instances of protected concerted activity. The NLRB is governed by a five-person board and a General Counsel, all of whom are appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate. Board members are appointed to five-year terms and the General Counsel is appointed to a four-year term. The General Counsel acts as a prosecutor and the Board acts as an appellate quasi-judicial body from decisions of administrative law judges.

The duty of fair representation is incumbent upon Canadian and U.S. labor unions that are the exclusive bargaining representative of workers in a particular group. It is the obligation to represent all employees fairly, in good faith, and without discrimination.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Association of Flight Attendants</span>

The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA is a union representing flight attendants in the United States. As of January 2018, AFA represents 50,000 flight attendants at 20 airlines. Since 2004, AFA has been part of the Communications Workers of America (CWA), an affiliate of AFL–CIO. AFA is also an affiliate of the International Transport Workers' Federation.

The National Labor Relations Board, an agency within the United States government, was created in 1935 as part of the National Labor Relations Act. Among the NLRB's chief responsibilities is the holding of elections to permit employees to vote whether they wish to be represented by a particular labor union. Congress amended the Act in 1947 through the Taft–Hartley Act to give workers the ability to decertify an already recognized or certified union as well. This article describes, in a very summary manner, the procedures that the NLRB uses to hold such elections, as well as the circumstances in which a union may obtain the right to represent a group of employees without an election.

An unfair labor practice (ULP) in United States labor law refers to certain actions taken by employers or unions that violate the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 29 U.S.C. § 151–169 and other legislation. Such acts are investigated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

The National Labor Board (NLB) was an independent agency of the United States Government established on August 5, 1933, to handle labor disputes arising under the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA).

Graduate student employee unionization, or academic student employee unionization, refers to labor unions that represent students who are employed by their college or university to teach classes, conduct research and perform clerical duties. As of 2014, there are at least 33 US graduate employee unions, 18 unrecognized unions in the United States, and 23 graduate employee unions in Canada. By 2019, it is estimated that there were 83,050 unionized student employees in certified bargaining units in the United States. Prior to the 2,000s almost all US graduate employee unions are located in public universities, most of which formed during the 1990s. However, that is no longer true today with many private universities now being organized. In 2014, New York University's Graduate Student Organizing Committee, affiliated with the United Automobile Workers (UAW), became the first graduate employee union recognized by a private university in the US. In September 2018, Brandeis University became the second private university to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement for graduate student employees, followed by Tufts University in October 2018 and Harvard in July 2020. American University and New School were in the process of negotiating an agreement as of September 2018. Many of these unions refer to their workers as Academic Student Employees (ASEs) to reflect the fact that their membership may also include undergraduate students working in represented job classifications. In 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) proposed a new rule that said graduate students are not employees, which could affect unionization efforts at private universities, although the final rule has yet to be published.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union</span> American trade union

Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU) is a labor union in the United States. Founded in 1937, the RWDSU represents about 60,000 workers in a wide range of industries, including but not limited to retail, grocery stores, poultry processing, dairy processing, cereal processing, soda bottlers, bakeries, health care, hotels, manufacturing, public sector workers like crossing guards, sanitation, and highway workers, warehouses, building services, and distribution.

Card check, also called majority sign-up, is a method for employees to organize into a labor union in which a majority of employees in a bargaining unit sign authorization forms, or "cards", stating they wish to be represented by the union. Since the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) became law in 1935, card check has been an alternative to the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) election process. Card check and election are both overseen by the National Labor Relations Board. The difference is that with card sign-up, employees sign authorization cards stating they want a union, the cards are submitted to the NLRB and if more than 50% of the employees submitted cards, the NLRB requires the employer to recognize the union. The NLRA election process is an additional step with the NLRB conducting a secret ballot election after authorization cards are submitted. In both cases the employer never sees the authorization cards or any information that would disclose how individual employees voted.

The Employee Free Choice Act is the name for several legislative bills on US labor law which have been proposed and sometimes introduced into one or both chambers of the U.S. Congress.

NLRB v. Hearst Publications, 322 U.S. 111 (1944), was an administrative law case heard before the United States Supreme Court. The case concerned the meaning of the term "employees" in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

<i>The Blue Eagle at Work</i>

The Blue Eagle at Work: Reclaiming Democratic Rights in the American Workplace is a legal treatise written by Charles J. Morris which analyzes collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal statute governing most private sector labor relations in the United States. Published in 2005 by Cornell University Press, the text claims that the NLRA guarantees that employees under that Act have the right to bargain collectively through minority unions—but only on a members-only basis—in workplaces where there is not an established majority union, notwithstanding that the present practice and general understanding of the law is that only majority-union employees are entitled to engage in collective bargaining on an exclusivity basis. Contracts resulting from such minority-union bargaining would apply to union members only, not to other employees.

NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., 304 U.S. 333 (1938), is a United States labor law case of the Supreme Court of the United States which held that workers who strike remain employees for the purposes of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The Court granted the relief sought by the National Labor Relations Board, which sought to have the workers reinstated by the employer. However, the decision is much better known today for its obiter dicta in which the Court said that an employer may hire strikebreakers and is not bound to discharge any of them if or when the strike ends.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Burke Group</span>

The Burke Group is a U.S.-based international management consulting firm. Formally known as Burke International and founded in 1982 by Steven J Burke Sr., the company has headquarters in Canberra, Australia; Casper, Wyoming, United States; Los Angeles, United States and London, United Kingdom.

Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative. The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights," and defining what Beck rights are and how a union must fulfill its duties regarding them is an active area of modern United States labor law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">J. Warren Madden</span> American judge

Joseph Warren Madden was an American lawyer, judge, civil servant, and educator. He served as a judge of the United States Court of Claims and was the first Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board. He received the Medal of Freedom in 1947.

The Labor Reform Act of 1977 was a proposed Act of the US Congress on US labor law that never came into force. It would have altered the labor legislation to bring it in line with modern developments and international standards by removing obstacles from employers to the formation of unions in the workplace.

South Prairie Construction Co. v. Local No 627, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, 425 U.S. 800 (1976), is a US labor law case, concerning the scope of labor rights in the United States.

References

  1. ↑ "FindLaw's United States DC Circuit case and opinions". Blue Man Vegas, LLC v. 720 AFL CIO. Thomson Reuters. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
  2. ↑ "29 U.S. Code § 159 - Representatives and elections". Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
  3. ↑ "29 U.S. Code § 158 - Unfair labor practices". Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
  4. ↑ "BLUE MAN VEGAS LLC v. [ BLUE MAN VEGAS LLC v.] 720 AFL CIO [ 720 AFL CIO]". FindLaw. Thomson Reuters. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
  5. ↑ Gorman, Robert; Finkin, Matthew; Glynn, Timothy (2016). Labor Law–Cases and Materials (Sixteenth ed.). St. Paul: LEG, Inc. p. 265. ISBN   978-1-62810-151-5.
  6. ↑ Gorman, Robert; Finkin, Matthew; Glynn, Timothy (2016). Labor Law–Cases and Materials (Sixteenth ed.). St. Paul: LEG, Inc. p. 267. ISBN   978-1-62810-151-5.
  7. ↑ "29 U.S. Code § 159 - Representatives and elections". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2018-08-15.
  8. ↑ "Lundy I at LexisNexis". 314 N.L.R.B. 1042. LexisNexis. Retrieved 15 August 2018.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.