Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LABOR—UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES—W.D. Pa.: NLRB regional director denied motion for Section 10(j) injunction in bargaining dispute with newspaper, (Feb 18, 2025)

By Ronald Miller, J.D.

At the hearing, the regional director’s evidentiary productions did not speak to the critical showings required—a likelihood of success on the merits.

Finding that an NLRB regional director failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, a federal district court in Pennsylvania denied a motion for injunctive relief under NLRA Section 10(j) in a bargaining dispute with a newspaper publisher. While multiple administrative law judges have found that the employer engaged in bad faith bargaining in significant respects, under Starbucks v. McKinney, the court is charged with an independent duty to assess the requirements before injunctive relief will issue. Because the court determined that the regional director had not demonstrated the likelihood of success on the merits, it denied the regional director’s third amended petition for injunctive relief (Wilson v. PG Publishing Co., Inc., No. 2:24-cv-01166-CB (W.D. Pa. Feb. 13, 2025)).

Bargaining units. The regional director’s original petition sought relief on behalf of four overarching groups of bargaining units. According to the regional director, this was done because the unions negotiated in unity, as if they were one.

The regional director alleged that the employer has failed and refused to bargain in good faith with the unions that represents the employees in separate bargaining units and that the employer made unilateral changes to the terms and conditions of employment of the unit when it implemented its final offer after engaging in bad-faith bargaining with the union.

Success on the merits. At the hearing, the regional director’s evidentiary productions related almost exclusively to the hardships suffered by union members as a result of losing health insurance coverage. However, it did not speak to the critical showings required of the regional director—a likelihood of success on the merits.

Bargaining. The court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the employer had not been shown to have bargained in bad faith. However, the court found unconvincing the suggestion of a union witness that a 2020 healthcare agreement was signed under something akin to legal duress.

Moreover, the court found that the employer consistently made overtures to bargain regarding the terms and conditions of employment in its new digital environment (including effects bargaining). In contrast, the bargaining units thwarted bargaining efforts again and again, observed the court.

Although multiple ALJs have found that the employer engaged in bad faith bargaining in significant respects, the court noted that the employer did not hold a monopoly on causes for breakdown.

Under Starbucks v. McKinney, the court is charged with an independent duty to assess the requirements before injunctive relief will issue. Here, the court determined that the regional director had not demonstrated the likelihood of success on the merits. Thus, the court denied the regional director’s third amended petition for injunctive relief. The court declined to reach the remaining McKinney factors.

The case is No. 2:24-cv-01166-CB.

Judge: Bissoon, C.

Attorneys: Anne Elaine Tewksbury, National Labor Relations Board, for Nancy Wilson. Brian M. Hentosz (Littler Mendelson) for PG Publishing Co., Inc.

Companies: PG Publishing Co., Inc.

Cases: Labor UnfairLaborPractices Bargaining Procedure PensionBenefitPlans AgencyNews PennsylvaniaNews