This is the last point that follows the usual neutrality agreements in the hotel and restaurant sector and in other sectors. In particular, GC Robb provided examples of neutrality provisions that the analysis said would be prohibited “more than ministerial assistance”: “Sometimes a company can be pressured by a unionized customer to enter into a neutrality agreement,” he said. Sometimes unions do corporate campaigns and picketing and similar tactics to use a company to agree to close one. In reviewing the appeal, General Counsel partially agreed with the Fund and concluded that, according to the Office of General Counsel, he believed that certain parts of the indictment were legally sound and that an appeal should be filed so that General Counsel could finally ask the House to find that such neutrality agreements were contrary to the law. In its letter, in which it partially supported the Fund`s request for revision, the General Counsel considered that the employer appeared to have broken the law by concluding and maintaining a neutrality agreement with the Union, since the EU neutrality agreement during the UNION`s organisational campaign provided much more than “ministerial assistance”. For the same reasons, General Counsel found that the Union had broken the law by accepting such aid from the employer. As a result, the case was remanded in custody with the Regional Director of Region 19 for further work. In the absence of an agreement, the Regional Director should file a complaint against the employer and the Union, claiming that the employer and the Union have provided illegal aid and would probably seek an injunction ordering the employer to withdraw its recognition of the Union, unless the Union is confirmed by a secret vote of the Board of Directors. While the hearing will be heard before an NLRB administrative judge, who will be required to follow existing board precedents, it is to be expected that General Counsel will ultimately attempt to get the five-member Washington Board of Directors to look into this issue and adopt a new standard to determine whether a neutrality agreement is legal or goes too far. Neutrality agreements often require the employer to have a communication or letter announcing the neutrality agreement itself. Mr.
Robb cautioned that “the content of this notice or letter must be closely examined to determine whether it is legal.” For example, such a communication or letter in which the employer advises workers: that union policy organizers will be on hand to speak and/or distribute authorization cards with employees, or contains a particular language indicating the employer`s preference for the union to cross the line of illegitimate assistance, as the behaviour is comparable to that where the Board of Directors found it illegal for an employer to order workers to speak to other workers distributing a deontalization note. Oh, Lord.