Issue: Labor
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
 
Term: October 2016
Lower Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 
Question Presented:
Whether the National Labor Relations Board must explain the legal significance of factual distinctions between included and excluded employees when deciding if a petitioned-for “unit [is] appropriate for . . . collective bargaining.” 29 U.S.C. § 159(b).
 
RLC Position:
The RLC filed an amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court in support of Macy’s petition for certiorari in Macy’s v. NLRB. The brief asks the Court to review the Fifth Circuit’s decision affirming the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) determination that a “microunion” of cosmetics employees in a store was appropriate for bargaining purposes, despite the fact that the majority of employees in the store voted against the union when the union tried to organize the store as a whole. The RLC's brief explains the importance of the longstanding presumption that the “whole store” is the appropriate bargaining unit in the retail context and the harm that will be caused to retail employees, customers, and retail companies if the NLRB’s ruling is allowed to stand.

Case Outcome:
The Court denied the petition for certiorari.

Procedural History and Case Documents: