The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Workers Rights: What's At Stake for All Americans with a Supreme Court Vacancy

IndependentCourt.org - 7/15/05

A number of rights, freedoms, and legal safeguards protecting all Americans currently hang in the balance, given the sharply divided makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court. It is critical that future appointments to the Court are committed to protecting our rights and the fundamental principle of an independent judiciary. Justices should not be on an ideological crusade to shift the direction of the Court. As shown by the narrowly decided cases below, critical worker protections are at stake, including: the right to minimum wages and overtime compensation provided by the Fair Labor Standards Act; the right to unpaid leave when a worker or family member is seriously ill provided by the Family and Medical Leave Act; the right to a safe workplace provided by the Occupational Safety and Health Act; and the right to organize a union and bargain over terms and conditions of employment, provided by the National Labor Relations Act.

Right of registered nurses and live haul workers to organize a union

In National Labor Relations Board v. Kentucky River Community Care, Inc. (2001), the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 margin, invalidated the National Labor Relations Board's test for determining whether registered nurses were eligible to join a union, or were excluded on grounds of being "supervisory" employees. The NLRB had ruled that the nurses were eligible to form a union; the Supreme Court reversed. In Holly Farms Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (1996), the Court, again by a 5-4 margin, upheld the Labor Board's determination that workers who catch, cage, and transport live chickens to a processing facility have the right to organize a union protected by the National Labor Relations Act, and are not excluded on grounds of being "agricultural" employees.

Right of state employees to enforce their statutory rights in the courts

In a series of cases, the Supreme Court, by a slim 5-4 majority, restricted the ability of state employees to seek relief in court against their state employer for violations of labor and employment laws. In Alden v. Maine (1999), the court denied state probation officers the right to recover unpaid overtime compensation under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act. In Kimel v. Florida Board of Regents (2000), the court denied university professors and librarians the right to seek relief under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. In Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama v. Garrett (2001), the court denied the director of nursing at a University of Alabama hospital who was transferred to a lower paying job after returning to work from breast cancer treatments the right to sue for damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act. As a result of these cases, millions of state employees are left without adequate remedies for violations of these laws, and a double standard is created, under which private sector employees have legal recourse and state employees do not.

Right of workers to backpay when they are unlawfully discharged for forming a union

In Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc., v. NLRB (2002), the Court, by a 5-4 margin, said that employers do not have to pay the typical back pay remedy when they illegally fire or discriminate against workers seeking to form a union, if those workers happen to be undocumented immigrant workers. As a result, employers face no monetary consequences under the National Labor Relations Act for firing or otherwise discriminating against undocumented workers seeking to exercise their right to form a union.

Ability of states to adopt workplace safety rules

In Gade v. National Solid Wastes Management Ass'n. (1992), the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 margin, ruled that states may not adopt laws regulating workplace safety and health unless they adopt a federally-approved state OSHA plan. As a result, training requirements for hazardous waste workers in Illinois, and similar laws in other states, were invalidated.

Right of union organizers to communicate with workers

In Lechmere, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (1992), the Court, by a 6-3 margin, held that employers may, except in limited circumstances, bar non-employee union organizers from their property to prevent them from talking to workers about organizing a union.