Just Google it.
The National Labor Relations Board has been drawing a lot of attention for its heightened scrutiny of at-will employment disclaimers. For example, in a case involving the American Red Cross, a Board ALJ found that the American Red Cross broke the law by having an employee handbook policy that stated, in part, "I further agree that the at-will employment relationship cannot be amended, modified or altered in any way."
But new guidance from the NLRB's Acting General Counsel confirms what I've been saying: Don't even think about scrapping those employee handbook at-will employment disclaimers. (Maybe a small tweak may do the trick).
But first, before we get to the NLRB discussion, I owe y'all an answer to yesterday's "you be the judge" post. The question was whether the employer could enforce a general release against a former employee who signed and then decided to pursue discrimination claims. The answer is "no." The case is Monk v. Hirsch Industries, LLC (and the analysis begins on page 5 of the opinion).
And, now, back to Board business.
According to this press release, the Board's Acting General Counsel has concluded that the following at-will employment disclaimers are lawful:
What distinguishes these provisions from the Red Cross language? According to the Acting General Counsel, it's the possibility that the at-will relationship may change. Otherwise, language suggesting that the at-will relationship will last forever could chill employees from exerting their rights under the National Labor Relations Act to organize and unionize. (Many union workplaces require "cause" prior to termination).
Private employers, especially those in non-union settings -- remember the Act applies to you too -- should consider modifying their at-will employment disclaimers to open the door to a future change in the at-will employment relationship.
Just make sure that door is open ever so slightly.
Lexis.com subscribers can access the Lexis enhanced version of the Monk v. Hirsh Indus., LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153254 (D. Del. Oct. 25, 2012), decision with summary, headnotes, and Shepard's.
This article was originally published on Eric B. Meyer's blog, The Employer Handbook.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.