Electromation, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Labor Law

Labor LawNLRASection 8(a)(2)company-dominated labor organizationsemployee committeesNLRASection 2(5)Section 8(a)(2)

Facts

Electromation changed its attendance bonus and wage policies, prompting a signed employee protest. In response, management created five action committees on subjects including absenteeism, attendance bonuses, pay progression, communication, and smoking policy; management defined the committees' subjects and goals, selected or limited employee membership, appointed management representatives, coordinated meetings, paid employees for meeting time, and supplied facilities and materials. The committees met on company premises and addressed ordinary terms and conditions of employment, and at least one committee developed proposals that management reviewed for cost and possible implementation. After a union demanded recognition, the company withdrew from the committees, and the Board later charged Electromation with unlawfully dominating labor organizations.

Issue

Whether Electromation's action committees were labor organizations within NLRA § 2(5), and if so, whether Electromation unlawfully dominated, interfered with, or supported them in violation of NLRA § 8(a)(2) and (1).

Rule

Under NLRA § 2(5), a committee is a labor organization if employees participate in it, it exists at least in part for the purpose of dealing with the employer, and those dealings concern grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours, or conditions of work. 'Dealing with' is broader than collective bargaining and includes a bilateral mechanism in which employees make proposals on statutory subjects and management actually or apparently considers them. Under § 8(a)(2), an employer violates the Act when it controls the form, structure, or administration of such a labor organization, or supports it in a way that deprives employees of the independence and free choice protected by § 7.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

At a parts plant in Toledo, Ohio, North Harbor Components created a "schedule review panel" after workers complained about weekend assignments. The company invited five hourly employees and two supervisors to meet weekly and develop proposals on shift rotations and overtime distribution, which plant management would then review and possibly adopt.

Is the panel most likely a labor organization under the Act?

Explanation. A labor organization exists when employees participate, the group exists at least in part to deal with the employer, and the subject concerns grievances, wages, hours, or conditions of work. The majority treated 'dealing with' as broader than collective bargaining and sufficient where employees make proposals and management actually or apparently considers them. Shift rotations and overtime distribution concern statutory subjects, so the panel likely qualifies. (Derived from Electromation, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (n.d.).)