Judge nixes newspaper's attack on NLRB, but says it's 'not outlandish'
By Daniel Wiessner
Oct 23 (Reuters) -A federal judge has rejected a Pittsburgh newspaper publisher's claims that the National Labor Relations Board's structure is unconstitutional, but suggested that decades of precedent backing the agency could be vulnerable to a growing number of legal challenges.
U.S. District Judge Cathy Bissoon in Pittsburgh said in a brief docket entry on Tuesday that a 1937 U.S. Supreme Court ruling upholding the National Labor Relations Act, which had been adopted two years earlier was still good law, contrary to arguments by PG Publishing, the owner of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
Bissoon denied PG's motion to dismiss an NLRB petition seeking to force the company to bargain in good faith with three unions pending the outcome of a related administrative case at the board.
PG claims that the NLRB's in-house enforcement proceedings are illegal, echoing arguments in more than 20 lawsuits filed against the board, and that the agency lacks the power to seek court injunctions, which it does in a small number of cases each year.
Bissoon said those arguments were foreclosed by the 1937 ruling in NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel and, much more recently, the Supreme Court's June ruling clarifying the standard the board must meet to win an injunction in court.
But the judge said that respect for the legal doctrine that courts should follow existing precedent, known as stare decisis, "appears less 'in vogue' as of late."
"While PG's positions are not outlandish by contemporary standards, this Court declines its invitation to ignore nearly a century's worth of settled jurisprudence," wrote Bissoon, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama.
The Post-Gazette and an NLRB spokeswoman declined to comment.
In the underlying board case, PG is accused of bargaining in bad faith with three of its employees' unions and unilaterally implementing changes to the working conditions of newsroom staff in the absence of a bargaining agreement. The company has denied wrongdoing.
The NLRB filed a court petition in August seeking a temporary order requiring PG to bargain in good faith with the unions until the board case is resolved. PG moved to dismiss the petition on Monday, arguing that NLRB administrative judges and the board's five members are improperly shielded from being removed at will by the president.
Bissoon on Tuesday said she agreed with a federal judge in Michigan who recently rejected those arguments in a lawsuit by auto parts manufacturer Yapp USA Automotive Systems. The Supreme Court last week denied Yapp's petition to block a board case against it from moving forward while it appeals the judge's decision.
At least four other federal judges have sided with the NLRB in bids by other companies, including Amazon, to block administrative cases from proceeding while they pursue challenges to the agency's structure.
Three judges in Texas, meanwhile, have blocked board cases against Elon Musk's SpaceX, pipeline company Energy Transfer, and the operator of a search engine for social services, prompting appeals by the NLRB.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, widely regarded as the most conservative federal appeals court, has scheduled arguments in the Amazon and SpaceX cases for Nov. 18.
The case is Wilson v. PG Publishing Co, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:24-cv-01166.
For the NLRB: Anne Tewksbury and Zuzana Murarova
For PG Publishing: Brian Hentosz and Morgan Dull of Littler Mendelson
Read more:
US Supreme Court backs Starbucks over fired pro-union workers
US judge rejects auto parts maker's challenge to NLRB structure
US Supreme Court won't block NLRB case pending challenge to its structure
Amazon wins temporary pause on NLRB case over NYC union election
SpaceX wins block on US labor board case over severance agreements
NLRB's Abruzzo hits back at 'low-road' companies challenging agency's structure
Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York
免责声明: XM Group仅提供在线交易平台的执行服务和访问权限，并允许个人查看和/或使用网站或网站所提供的内容，但无意进行任何更改或扩展，也不会更改或扩展其服务和访问权限。所有访问和使用权限，将受下列条款与条例约束：(i) 条款与条例；(ii) 风险提示；以及(iii) 完整免责声明。请注意，网站所提供的所有讯息，仅限一般资讯用途。此外，XM所有在线交易平台的内容并不构成，也不能被用于任何未经授权的金融市场交易邀约和/或邀请。金融市场交易对于您的投资资本含有重大风险。
所有在线交易平台所发布的资料，仅适用于教育/资讯类用途，不包含也不应被视为用于金融、投资税或交易相关咨询和建议，或是交易价格纪录，或是任何金融商品或非应邀途径的金融相关优惠的交易邀约或邀请。
本网站上由XM和第三方供应商所提供的所有内容，包括意见、新闻、研究、分析、价格、其他资讯和第三方网站链接，皆保持不变，并作为一般市场评论所提供，而非投资性建议。所有在线交易平台所发布的资料，仅适用于教育/资讯类用途，不包含也不应被视为适用于金融、投资税或交易相关咨询和建议，或是交易价格纪录，或是任何金融商品或非应邀途径的金融相关优惠的交易邀约或邀请。请确保您已阅读并完全理解，XM非独立投资研究提示和风险提示相关资讯，更多详情请点击 这里。
