Comments on: “Theater of the Absurd: The NLRB Takes on the Employee Handbook”

By: gitarcarver

gitarcarver — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 18:41:12 +0000

One of the things the Chamber of Commerce document complains about is EEOC claiming employees may use the trademark of the company when complaining about the company on social media. The COC claims this is a theft of intellectual property.

It is not.

By: MattS

MattS — Sat, 13 Feb 2016 13:58:06 +0000

In reply to John Rohan. The NLRB's position on confidentiality requirements for workplace misconduct investigations is also contrary to the EEOC's requirements.

By: John Rohan

John Rohan — Fri, 12 Feb 2016 19:47:48 +0000

In reply to Allan. So Allan, you missed the part where the NLRB forced an employer to allow an employee to wear an offensive T-shirt, yet the EEOC would fine the employer for it. So an employer has a situation where they will be fined, no matter what they do. That is the definition of absurd under any administration.

By: David

David — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:45:51 +0000

Link to the document: https://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/documents/files/nlrb_theater_of_the_absurd.pdf

By: Allan

Allan — Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:17:12 +0000

I dunno. I am not sure that the cited portions of the employee handbooks are “uncontroversial.” As for absurdity, I guess it is in the eyes of the beholder. There are a great number of people who think that saying corporations are people is absurd. There are others that think the idea that the federal government can own substantial amount of land in the states is absurd.

I would posit that the pendulum has swung way to the side of according rights to employees, much in the way that, under a Republican president the pendulum would (and will) swing way to the side of according less rights to employees. However, I would not call it absurd. Instead, I would call it interpreting the law in favor of one’s constituency.