Advertisement

May 18, 2013

Second Circuit Overturns NLRB, Upholds Starbucks' One-Button Rule for Union Insignia

Barnes & Thornburg LLP - a national law firm of more than 550 professionals
Christine Holst
Barnes & Thornburg LLP
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Administrative & Regulatory / Labor & Employment
2nd Circuit (incl. bankruptcy)
Printer-friendly
Email this Article
Download PDF
Reprints & Permissions

Employers were handed a victory by the Second Circuit last week after the court refused to enforce an NLRB order finding that Starbucks Corp. violated the NLRA by refusing to allow organizing employees to wear more than one union button. 

The general rule is that employees have the right to wear union insignia at work unless the employer can show special circumstances that would justify restricting that right. In this case, although Starbucks had a policy that encouraged employees to wear multiple buttons promoting its products, the court found that a one-button limit on union buttons was a justifiable limitation necessary to prevent “dilution” of Starbucks message on its corporate buttons. The entire decision is available on the Second Circuit’s website here.

© 2013 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Christine Holst
Associate

Christine Holst is an associate in the Grand Rapids office of Barnes & Thornburg and is a member of the firm’s Labor and Employment Law Department. She focuses her practice on general labor and employment matters and defense of Title VII, ADEA, and other employment discrimination cases.

christine.holst@btlaw.com
616-742-3927
www.btlaw.com

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 www.NatLawReview.com 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. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or 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.