Following an unsuccessful effort to unionize franchise restaurants of the Jimmy John’s chain around the Minneapolis area, run by a firm named MikLin, the Industrial Workers of the World union (“Wobblies”) began a second campaign, as John Hauge 
explains at Minnesota Employer:
Part of the campaign involved putting up posters that called into question the healthfulness of sandwiches prepared in MikLin’s shops. The posters erroneously stated that employees were not allowed to call in sick, and implied that persons eating the sandwiches risked illness by doing so. Several employees supporting the campaign met with MikLin to demand that it provide sick pay to employees, and threatened to put the posters up all over the Twin Cities. The union also issued a press release entitled “Jimmy John’s Workers Blow the Whistle on Unhealthy Working Conditions.”
In a 1953 case called NLRB v. Electrical Workers Local 1229 (Jefferson Standard), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that although federal labor law in general forbids employers to dismiss workers for union advocacy, it makes an exception for expressions of “disloyalty”, as in the case of “a sharp, public, disparaging attack upon the quality of the company’s product and its business policies, in a manner reasonably calculated to harm the company’s reputation and reduce its income.” In those cases, the Court ruled, an employer was still free to dismiss the disloyal workers, union activists or no.
You might think that would fit the facts of the Jimmy John’s case quite well, especially given the falsity of the assertion that the restaurant workers couldn’t take sick leave. But an administrative law judge at the NLRB has disagreed, ordering back pay and reinstatement for the dismissed union workers and dismissing the falsity as mere “hyperbole.”
Hauge at Minnesota Employer calls the decision “creative” and warns readers that (assuming the decision is not overturned at the board level) the NLRB may be increasingly inclined to extend protection against “retaliation” to a wider swath of “untrue, malicious and/or disparaging” talk during union campaigns. At least when it comes from the pro-union side.
Tagged as:
labor unions,
restaurants
Josh Barro explains why he prefers establishments that get a “B” rather than an “A” grade from NYC hygiene inspectors. [Forbes]
Tagged as:
food safety,
NYC,
restaurants
New York’s notoriously stringent Department of Labor has fined a pizza shop owner $5,535 for not giving his employees enough polo shirts to wear — at least five for those who work five days a week, even if they work only a few hours a day. Owner Christian King
was told that an appeal would take years due to the backlog and the fine would accrue with interest….
“What happened to him is not unusual,” agreed Richard De Groot, a Syracuse consultant who advises businesses — including King’s — on human resource issues. He represents employers across much of the Eastern Seaboard and says New York is unusually demanding.
“There is so much in the way of state rules and laws,” he said, adding that he would advise some businesses, such as manufacturers, to simply look to elsewhere.
[Albany TImes-Union via Stoll]
Tagged as:
New York,
restaurants,
small business,
wage and hour suits
Cracked has a selection that includes disgraced Pennsylvania judge Michael Joyce (on whom), the pro wrestler on disability, a church with leaders who “have had so many X-rays that I wouldn’t be surprised if they glowed in the dark,” and — eeeeuw! — a couple of deliberately glass-eating restaurant-goers.
Tagged as:
insurance fraud,
restaurants
Entrepreneurial lawyers have filed numerous suits against New York City restaurants over alleged violations of tip-splitting and overtime rules, a trend helped along by wage rulings from the state Labor Department. Now one of the town’s best-known restaurateurs says he’s had enough, per the New York Post:
“Money-hungry lawyers, through frivolous lawsuits, are shaking down the very foundation of Manhattan’s restaurant industry,” fumed Joe Bastianich, co-owner of Eataly, Del Posto and Babbo.
Bastianich said the litigation — he has been sued twice — has left such a bitter taste that he’s done with setting up new ventures in New York.
“We opened Eataly and put 700 jobs in the New York economy. Since then we haven’t opened another restaurant in New York, nor will we,” Bastianich told The Post. “We opened three other restaurants, in California and Connecticut, worth 1,000 jobs that could have been here in New York. Someone in Albany needs to understand the agenda, what this is really costing the greatest restaurant city in the world.”
Earlier here, etc.
Tagged as:
NYC,
restaurants,
wage and hour suits
- Feds fund Boston campaign bashing sweetened drinks [Globe; see also on NYC] More on ObamaCare “Public Health Fund” subsidies to local paternalist initiatives on diet [WLF]
- Thanks to federal funding priorities, New York education department had 40 experts on school lunches, only one on science education [Frederick Hess via Stoll]
- Grocers hope to escape federal menu labeling mandate [FDA Law Blog] How regulations exasperate midsize restaurant operators [Philip Klein, Wash. Examiner]
- “The Eight Dumbest Restaurant Laws” [Zagat]
- Proposed federal standards on kid food ads extreme enough that many USDA “healthy” recipes would flunk [Diane Katz, Heritage] Do FTC’s guidelines violate the First Amendment? [WSJ]
- Compared with what? “Egg farm regulations still skimpy” [Stoll] Deer blamed for E. coli in pick-your-own strawberries [USA Today]
- U.K.: Your kids are too fat so we’re taking them away [Daily Mail; earlier here, here, etc.]
Tagged as:
advertising,
Boston,
eat drink and be merry,
Federal Trade Commission,
food safety,
nanny state,
New York,
obesity,
restaurants,
schools
New York: “A 290-pound diner claims the White Castle chain has violated the civil rights of its more sizable clientele by not following through on promises to make its tight booths bigger to accommodate their bellies.” [S.F. Chronicle]
Tagged as:
disabled rights,
obesity,
restaurants
Groupon and other novel discount-voucher services have been enjoying much attention lately. But state consumer law has long imposed substantial regulation on the practice of coupon discounting: some states bar the use of coupons for the purchase of alcoholic drinks, others require that coupons carry a maturity at least as long as five years or some other time span, and so forth. Are the new social-discount services at risk for significant legal exposure? [Benjamin Edelman and Paul Kominers via Felix Salmon]
Tagged as:
restaurants
- Claim: unwanted sugar in Dunkin’ Donuts coffee order sent customer into diabetic shock [AP]
- Schadenfreude aside, key theory in feds’ case against John Edwards looking mighty strained [Meck Deck/John Locke Foundation, Steve Hayward/Power Line, Ted Frank, Jacob Sullum] “They’ve indicted one former presidential candidate on one count of false statements?” [Caleb Brown] American Lawyer looks back at the law firms that backed Edwards in 2008; our coverage of his ’04 law-firm backers and of moneyman Fred Baron, and my commentary on Baron’s ethical standards;
- Edwards-reminiscent? Theory that earlier C-section would have averted cerebral palsy nets $58 M verdict [Thomas Scheffey, Connecticut Law Tribune]
- Carter Wood, key business-policy blogger, departs NAM for Business Roundtable;
- Tenderer tort-law treatment for trespassers, courtesy 3rd Restatement? [David Freddoso/Examiner, Richard Cupp via TortsProf]
- Non-shockingly, some litigation defense lawyers aren’t enthusiastic about lawsuit reform [Texas Lawyer]
- “Attorney charged with stealing clerk’s textbook from courtroom” [Baltimore Sun]
Tagged as:
criminals who sue,
defense lawyers,
don't,
John Edwards,
obstetrics,
restaurants
