Supreme Court Issues Decision That Puts Important Limits On The NRLB

On June 13, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that will require the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to prove that it would be likely to succeed on the merits of a case before its leadership seeks to obtain a preliminary injunction against employers.

Why was this ruling an important one? As one law firm explained, the NLRB may bring administrative enforcement proceedings against employers and labor unions for engaging in unfair labor practices, and that process begins when an individual files a charge that alleges an employer or union has engaged in an unfair labor practice. After an investigation, a regional NLRB director can file an administrative complaint with the agency. Because the administrative complaint process can take years, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) allows the NLRB to request that a federal district court issue a preliminary injunction against the employer or labor union while the enforcement proceedings are pending.

In recent years, the NLRB has sought these injunctions more and more, even pursuing them against employers based on flawed legal theories and unsubstantiated claims. In doing so, the NLRB has argued temporary injunctions should be granted by courts as long as the board could show there was “reasonable cause” to believe a company had violated labor law, and without requiring the NLRB to prove any additional factors.

Business groups, including Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), which the Metals Service Center Institute is a member of, have countered, arguing the NLRB should be held to a stricter standard — the same standard that is applied to other federal agencies and most other court orders.

In the decision last week, the Supreme Court sided with the CDW, and the decision will make it harder for the NLRB to issue injunctions based on unsupported claims. The CDW’s statement on the decision can be found here.