Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Supreme Court Grants Review in Card-Check Neutrality Case

By Howard M. Bloom on June 24, 2013
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The U.S. Supreme Court has just granted certiorari in a case involving use of card check neutrality agreements in a labor context. United Here Local 355 v. Mulhall, No. 12-99. Although not as significant as the Noel Canning NLRB recess appointment case for which the Supreme Court also granted review this morning, this issue is significant for our union-free and partially unionized clients since it is a common approach used by unions today.  The question presented is:

Whether an employer and union may violate Section 302 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 186, by entering into an agreement under which the employer exercises its freedom of speech by promising to remain neutral to union organizing, its property rights by granting union representatives limited access to the employer’s property and employees, and its freedom of contract by obtaining the union’s promise to forego its rights to picket, boycott, or otherwise put pressure on the employer’s business.

See our previous post on this case here. Jackson Lewis will prepare a more extensive analysis of the Court’s action shortly.

Photo of Howard M. Bloom Howard M. Bloom
Read more about Howard M. BloomEmail
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Labor & Collective Bargaining
  • Organization:
    Jackson Lewis P.C.

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo