Thursday, July 13, 2006

The NLRB Hurts a Handbook

The National Labor Relations Board held in Long's Drugs that a handbook's confidential information policy violated the National Labor Relations Act. As a result, the employer was required to rescind the policy and post a notice. However, the Board did not require a new union election, which the employer had won the first time around.

Here is the Board's discussion of the policy language that the Board held violated the NLRA:

The Respondent’s 2000 handbook, under the heading “Corrective Action/ Employee Conduct,” states that “Unauthorized disclosure of confidential information regarding customers, employees, or the business of the company” is conduct subject to discipline, including discharge. A provision directly following this general confidentiality provision, under the heading “Privileges of a Team Member,” states, “Your pay is confidential company information and should not be discussed with fellow employees.” Neither of the aforementioned provisions appears in the 2003 handbook, which at relevant times was distributed to only five unit employees. However, the 2003 handbook, under the heading “Professional Behavior,” states that the Respondent “expects compliance with the following behaviors . . . Maintain confidentiality, including but not limited to, information regarding customers, employees and the company.” The handbook further states that employees are “expected to adhere to the policies and procedures that protect customer and employee confidential information, and thereby, comply with federal and state privacy laws,” and that the Respondent trusts employees not to disclose “such information to unauthorized persons, or organizations, or using it for personal gain.”
Sounds like a lot of handbooks, right? Well, here's what the NLRB said about the confidentiality language:

As noted, the 2000 handbook contains a general confidentiality provision and a
particular confidentiality provision prohibiting the discussion of wages. The 2003 handbook contains a general confidentiality provision. . . . . With respect to the general provisions, which are alleged to be unlawful, we believe that they must be read in the context of the particular provision and Gilbert’s specific affirmation that the Respondent considered employee wage rates to be confidential information. So read, we conclude that the general provisions of the 2000 and 2003 handbooks, which prohibit the disclosure of confidential information, are unlawful.

Does the confidentiality language above seem similar to the one in your handbook? Are employees prohibited from discussing working conditions including their wages? There are a number of provisions in an employee handbook that may implicate the National Labor Relations Act, including solicitation, bulletin boards, prohibitions on discussing wages, promises to abide by all policies, and even "insubordination" prohibitions. The NLRB may take jurisdiction of a claim even when the employer is "non-union." So, be careful out there....