The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) commands that an employer must bargain in good faith with a union. To this end, the employer must furnish all information relevant to the union’s bargaining obligations. Specifically, employers must provide information that pertains to bargaining unit employees’ terms and conditions of employment.
How Much Can a Union Request?
However, in Crozer-Chester Medical Center v. National Labor Relations Board, the 3rd Circuit rolled back a union’s information request regarding the employer’s sales agreement. Crozer-Chester Medical Center is a health care network of four hospitals and several other health care facilities located in Pennsylvania. The employer decided to sell its operations to another party, prompting notice by the employer to the union and its employees informing them of the sale and potential impact on current employees. Upon receipt of the letter, the union requested a complete copy of the agreement, along with all attachments and schedules. Both sides communicated with each other regarding production of the agreement.
Ultimately, the employer asserted confidentiality to portions of the agreement and would not agree to provide it to the union without entering into a confidentiality agreement. The union responded by filing an unfair labor practice charge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
The NLRB Orders Broad Production
At the trial level, the administrative law judge (ALJ) determined the employer violated the NLRA and engaged in bad-faith bargaining by refusing to produce the agreement and ordered the employer to produce the entirety of the agreement. Upon appealing the ALJ’s order, an NLRB panel adopted the decision of the ALJ.
The Court of Appeals Reigns in the NLRB
The parties appealed to the 3rd Circuit after the employer petitioned for review. The 3rd Circuit affirmed the judgment that the employer violated the NLRA by refusing to produce the agreement. The union established the relevance of the entire agreement.
The Circuit Court held the NLRB abused its discretion. The Court held that the employer did not have to furnish the entirety of the agreement. In short, the union failed to establish the relevance of the entire agreement. As a result, the employer did not violate the NLRA for failing to produce irrelevant parts of the agreement.
What Should Employers Do?
In conclusion, this case establishes a couple of important takeaways. First, it is unwise for employers to blanketly refuse to produce information in response to a union’s information request, unless such requests do not touch upon bargaining unit employee’s terms and conditions of employment. Secondly, employers should work with unions to strike a balance between the union’s requested information and the employer’s interest in preserving confidentiality in order to avoid lengthy and costly litigation before the NLRB.
