Publications

NLRB Limits Employers’ Ability to Restrict Employee Email Use During Nonworking Time, Reversing Precedent

12/12/2014 Articles

The National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) overruled its precedent this week by holding that employee use of e-mail for collective action communications during nonworking time must presumptively be permitted where employers have given the same employees access to the employer’s email system.

Background

Respondent Purple Communications, Inc. offers sign-language and two-way telephone interpretation services for deaf individuals.  As with many workplaces, the company assigned its interpreter employees individual accounts on its email system, which the interpreters could access from their workstations, personal computers, and smartphones.  Purple’s electronic communications policy restricted use of company equipment, including email, to business purposes and expressly prohibited employees from using the equipment for “[e]ngaging in activities on behalf of organizations or persons with no professional or business affiliation with the Company” or for “sending uninvited email of a personal nature.”

CWA, the union representing the interpreters, alleged that the policy was an unfair labor practice because it interfered with employees’ rights to engage in protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Register Guard and the ALJ Decision

An administrative law judge initially found that the policy was lawful under Register Guard, a 2007 Board decision holding that an employer may completely prohibit employees from using the employer’s email system for Section 7 purposes without demonstrating any business justification, even if they are otherwise permitted access, so long as the employer’s ban is not applied discriminatorily.  The premise of that decision was that email systems are the equivalent of other employer communications-related equipment, including bulletin boards, copy machines, and telephones, and that employers are entitled under the NLRA to ban any nonwork use of such equipment by employees.

Board Reversal Overruling Register Guard

Upon review, the Board overturned Register Guard, finding that broad prohibitions on employees’ personal use of email communications presumptively interfere with Section 7 activity.  In so holding, it recognized the “necessity of communication” among employees to the practice of their free exercise of organization rights, and the ever-increasing importance of email as a form of workplace communication.  The Board reasoned that “email has become such a significant conduit for employees’ communications with one another that it is effectively a new ‘natural gathering place’ and a forum in which coworkers who ‘share common interests’ will seek to persuade fellow workers in matters affecting their union organizational life and other matters related to their status as employees.”

The Board concluded that the Register Guard decision had given too much weight to employers’ property rights.  It distinguished the flexibility and unlimited capacity of email systems from the earlier, more finite forms of communications equipment – such as telephones, copy machines, and bulletin boards – to which NLRB and court precedent had granted more significant property protections.  Instead of focusing on property rights, the Board applied a different balancing analysis whereby employee use of email for collective communications during nonworking time must presumptively be permitted by employers who have chosen to give employees access to their email systems.  The Board remanded the ultimate question of whether Purple’s policy violated the NLRA back to the administrative law judge who previously found it to be lawful.

There are some important limitations to the Board’s holding:

It applies only to employees who already have access to the employer’s email system in the course of their work and does not require access by non-employees. 

An employer may justify a total or partial ban on nonwork use of email, including Section 7 use on nonworking time, by demonstrating that special circumstances make the ban necessary to maintain production or discipline.  For example, the decision does not prevent an employer from prohibiting large attachments or audio/video if the employer can demonstrate that they would interfere with the email system’s efficient functioning.

The decision does not apply to any other type of electronic communications systems (such as Facebook or Twitter).

The decision does not prevent employers from continuing to monitor their computers and email systems for legitimate management reasons, such as ensuring productivity and preventing email use for harassment or other purposes that could give rise to employer liability.

Despite these limitations, the decision substantially affects employers’ ability to restrict employees’ nonworking use of email during work hours.  It establishes that prohibitive email communications policies may run afoul of the NLRA regardless of whether they purport to limit working or non-working email use, and regardless of whether other venues or modes of communication for Section 7 activity are available.  The Board recognized that its decision will lead to future questions about how it will affect other electronic communications systems now in existence and yet to come.  At a minimum, employers will need to update their electronic communications policies to ensure that they do not restrict Section 7 rights.  They should also consider reviewing their policies with respect to other forms of electronic communication (such as Twitter and Facebook) that, like email, have become fixtures in the workplace.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Nonprofit Quick Tip: State Filings in North Carolina and South Carolina

Welcome to  EO Radio Show - Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . Episode 75 is the tenth in a series of Quick Tip episodes focusing on the details of state registration of nonprofit corporations. With...

Read More
Publication

Corporate Transparency Act: State of the Law and Beneficial Ownership Reporting Requirements

Key Points: Despite ongoing legal challenges, the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA) generally remains in effect and enforceable. Clients should continue to abide by its regulations. Initial reports for entities formed in 2024 are due within...

Read More
News

Farella Announces 2024 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity Pathfinders: Taylor Rottjakob and John Ugai

Farella Braun + Martel is proud to announce that senior associates  Taylor E. Rottjakob and John M. Ugai have been named 2024 Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Pathfinders. Pathfinders have been identified as...

Read More
News

North Coast Industry Insiders Weigh In on Why California Cannabis Tax Revenue Slipped in 2023

Jeff Hamilton spoke to Susan Wood with the North Bay Business Journal for the article "North Coast Industry Insiders Weigh In on Why California Cannabis Tax Revenue Slipped in 2023." Read the article with Jeff's...

Read More
Publication

Insurance Market Crushes Wineries and Wine Country Homeowners

We keep hearing about how difficult it is for winery and vineyard owners to get property insurance these days, both for their homes and their wine businesses in California’s wildfire-prone areas. Those who have...

Read More
News

Scraping Battles: Meta Loses Legal Effort to Halt Harvesting of Personal Profiles

Alex Reese spoke to Matt Fleischer-Black of  Cybersecurity Law Report about the Meta v. Bright Data decision and its impact on U.S. scraping case law. Read the article here (paywall or trial).

Read More
Publication

Employment Law Update for Nonprofits With Holly Sutton

Welcome to  EO Radio Show - Your Nonprofit Legal Resource . Charities, foundations, and their founders often request help addressing employment practices and compliance questions. In this episode, host Cynthia Rowland is joined by Holly...

Read More
News

JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'

Intellectual property practice chair Eugene Mar provided expert commentary to American Banker for the article "JPMorgan Chase Accuses TransUnion of Stealing 'Trade Secrets'." In the article, he said: "By filing this as a trade...

Read More
News

Farella Braun + Martel Earns San Francisco Green Business Recertification

Read More
Publication

Corporate Transparency Act: A Guide on Beneficial Ownership for Nonprofit Executives

The Corporate Transparency Act, enacted as part of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, represents a significant shift in regulatory requirements for entities across the United States. This act, set to...

Read More