July 22, 2014

NLRB Continues To Review General Employment Provisions

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) continued its recent trend of reviewing employment provisions often contained in employee handbooks or employment agreements.  On December 3, 2012, the NLRB’s Division of Advice released an Advice Memorandum dated May 16, 2012 in which it reviewed a “moonlighting” provision and a non-compete provision in an employment agreement.  The matter was submitted to the NLRB to review whether the provisions interfered unlawfully with the rights of employees to seek redress of workplace grievances collectively.  

The NLRB’s associate general counsel first reviewed a provision prohibiting moonlighting by employees (i.e. working for more than one employer simultaneously).  The associate general counsel determined that the provision could be read to prevent employees from engaging in the protected activity of salting, which is a labor union tactic for individuals to obtain a job in a particular workplace with the intent of organizing a union at the site. However, the general counsel also noted that such a provision is not unlawful if the provision was not issued in response to union activity or anti-union animus.  The general counsel therefore directed that the NLRB regional director conduct an investigation about whether the company acted with any anti-union animus.  

The associate general counsel also reviewed a non-compete clause that prohibited the employee from working for a competitor during employment and for two years thereafter.  The associate general counsel determined that the provision did not violate the National Labor Relations Act.   

Although this matter was submitted to the NLRB as part of a dispute between a union seeking to organize the workers and the company, this advice memorandum continues the recent trend of the NLRB to examine provisions commonly found in employment contracts and employment handbooks to determine if the provisions deter or prevent employees from discussing the terms and conditions of their employment or seeking to improve their employment collectively.   Over the last several months, the NLRB has opined about common provisions such as company investigations, policies prohibiting defamatory or disparaging comments, confidentiality policies, and social media policies.  In drafting or editing handbooks and contracts, employers should be  aware of the NLRB’s determinations and that it is actively reviewing policies and provisions to determine if employees are being deterred or prevented from seeking to improve their employment in a collective manner.  

©2014 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author


Eric B. Sigda is a shareholder in Greenberg Traurig’s Labor & Employment Practice. His represents management in litigating federal and state employment matters including claims involving allegations of discrimination, harassment, whistleblowing, Sarbanes-Oxley retaliation, breach of contract, wage and hour class actions, misappropriation of trade secrets and violations of restrictive covenants. Eric has handled matters in federal and state courts and in arbitration. He has also represented clients before various agencies including the Equal Employment Opportunity...


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.