loader
Page is loading...
Print Logo Logo
Plants-soil_detail

Supreme Court Favors Employer Property Rights Over Union Access To Employees


The Supreme Court recently decided in favor of employers on a property dispute with union agents seeking access to workers for purposes of union organizing. In Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, the Court invalidated a California statute that had granted union organizers the right to enter private property to meet with workers on-site. The Court focused on the balance between a property owner’s right to exclude people from its property and a union’s right to organize workers. 

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) excludes farmworkers, meaning the Court’s opinion does not directly impact the NLRA – but it could have an indirect impact. The NLRB has long found that employers have the right to exclude union agents from their property, subject only to two very limited exceptions: when the union agent cannot access the employees through other reasonable means, or when the employer enforces its property rights discriminatorily. Pro-union administrations in the past have attempted to change this balance between employer property rights and union agent access to employees, but the Supreme Court’s decision in Cedar Point Nursery implies that it would be supportive of the NLRB’s current pro-employer view. 

That NLRB view on employer property rights has been reinforced by NLRB decisions from the past few years. For example, in a case where the employer called the police on union agents in its parking lot, the Board found that an employer only discriminates against union agents seeking access to private property where the union’s activities are “similar in nature” to past activities that the employer permitted on its property. In another case, the Board found that an employer can eject union agents from public areas of its property under certain circumstances. 

The Supreme Court’s Cedar Point Nursery decision shows that the current high court is receptive to similar arguments favoring employers’ property rights, which is welcome news for non-union employers.


RELATED ARTICLES

NLRB Proposes Rescinding Trump Board Rule and Expanding Definition of ‘Joint Employer’

September 8, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board

With Tesla Decision, NLRB Rules Dress Codes Unlawful That Restrict Pro-Union Apparel

September 6, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board

How Much of Current Unionization Boom Is Attributable to Nationwide Starbucks Campaign?

September 1, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board, Union Organizing

Federal Court Orders Starbucks to Re-Hire Terminated Union Supporters

August 23, 2022 | Labor Relations, Unions and Union Membership

What a Journey: Negotiating a Union Contract May Take Longer Than You Think

August 15, 2022 | Labor Relations, Unions and Union Membership

Subscribe

Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.

View Subscription Center
RELATED TOPICS
NLRB
nlra
Union Organizing
Trending Connect
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to use cookies.