The recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision in NLRB v. Miller Plastics is a clear victory for workers’ rights but it also raises concerns about the implications for employers and the potential unintended consequences of such a ruling, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs).

NLRB v. Miller Plastics revolves around allegations of unfair labor practices by Miller Practices, a manufacturing company. A group of employees claimed that the company engaged in actions to intimidate and retaliate against them for their unionized efforts. The NLRB found the company in violation of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), sparking a debate on the balance between protecting workers’ rights and the potential repercussions for employers.

In March 2020, during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, Miller Plastics fired an employee who raised concerns about the company’s safety protocols and the decision to remain open for business, despite the company’s state (Pennsylvania) ordering all non-essential businesses to close. The employee made this complaint known to management in front of a group of other employees. The company argued that the employee’s COVID-19 related complaints were individual griping, not protected concerted activity. Miller Plastics also stated the reason for termination was because the employee had a poor attitude at work.

The key concerns from the decision include the burden on employers, erosion of employee-employer relations, potential for abuse and unintended job loss.

• The burden on employers: the decision places an enormous burden on employers, especially small to medium size businesses, who may struggle to navigate complex labor laws and regulations. Compliance with the NLRA can be challenging, and even well-intentioned employers may inadvertently find themselves in legal hot water.
• Erosion of employee-employer relations: while it is essential to protect workers’ rights, the NLRB’s decision may inadvertently harm employee-employer relations by fostering an adversarial atmosphere. Employers may become reluctant to engage with employees to address concerns, fearing potential NLRA violations.
• Potential for abuse: the ruling may open the door to potential abuse by some employees, leading to frivolous claims against employers.
• Unintended job loss: in an attempt to navigate the complexities of labor regulations, some employers may opt to cut jobs or reduce investment in their workforce, inadvertently leading to job loss for employees.

Rather than viewing employers as adversaries, we should encourage a collaborative approach to labor relations, where both workers and employers can work together to address concerns without the fear of punitive actions. While protecting workers’ rights is vital, it should not come at the expense of stifling entrepreneurship, discouraging investment, and harming economic growth.

The NLRB’s decision in NLRB v. Millers Plastics must serve as a reminder of the need for a balanced approach to labor relations that respects the rights and concerns of both workers and employers. This approach will enable us to foster a robust and dynamic job market, while upholding the principles of the NLRA in a fair and equitable manner.

If you have any concerns about the impact this may have on your business or any other employment related issues, please reach out to your contact at Mansour Gavin or one of our Labor and Employment attorneys.