Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overturned a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision that found Apple in violation of federal labor law at its World Trade Center retail store in New York. Here’s what that means.
A bit of background
The case centers on events from 2022, during an organizing campaign by Apple store employees in coordination with the Communications Workers of America (CWA).
One employee, Jordan Vasquez, testified that a senior manager asked him whether he had been speaking with coworkers about pay and how many people he had spoken to. The manager also allegedly inquired about unionization efforts.
The NLRB found this exchange to be a “coercive interrogation,” and found that Apple had violated the law by selectively removing union literature from the breakroom, while allowing other non-work-related materials, like restaurant coupons and newspapers, to remain.
In its appeal, Apple argued that the conversation with Vasquez was innocuous, and that breakroom policies were enforced consistently and without regard to content. Today, as reported by Courthouse News (via AppleInsider), the Fifth Circuit agreed:
On the interrogation claim: The Fifth Circuit rejected the Board’s finding that Apple’s manager unlawfully interrogated Vasquez, and emphasized that the conversation happened in public on the sales floor as part of a routine check-in. It also noted that the employee’s own testimony acknowledged he intentionally concealed his involvement in the organizing effort as a strategy to keep the campaign quiet until it went public days later.
The Fifth Circuit rejected the Board’s finding that Apple’s manager unlawfully interrogated Vasquez, and emphasized that the conversation happened in public on the sales floor as part of a routine check-in. It also noted that the employee’s own testimony acknowledged he intentionally concealed his involvement in the organizing effort as a strategy to keep the campaign quiet until it went public days later. On the flyer removal claim: The Board argued that Apple’s enforcement was selective, which would have violated the law. But the Fifth Circuit again sided with Apple, pointing to consistent testimony that managers removed a variety of unattended written materials, including personal event flyers and farewell party notices.
9to5Mac’s take
... continue reading