• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Cook Brown LLP

Let’s Keep the Workplace Working

  • Home
  • About
  • People
    • Dennis B. Cook
    • Ronald W. Brown
    • Brian D. Bertossa
    • Terry A. Wills
    • Carrie E. Bushman
    • Lisa V. Ryan
    • Barbara A. Cotter
    • Stephen R. McCutcheon
    • Alexis Gabrielson
    • Daniel F. C. Kozieja
    • Zachary Rankin
  • Practices
    • Employment Litigation
    • Labor Relations
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Wage and Hour
    • Prevailing Wage
    • Personnel Policies
    • Construction Litigation
    • Workplace Investigations
  • Programs
  • Updates
  • Contact
  • Careers
Home > Labor Relations > NLRB to Burger Chain: “Fight for $15 Buttons” are In-Not-Out

Stephen R. McCutcheon / April 2, 2017

NLRB to Burger Chain: “Fight for $15 Buttons” are In-Not-Out

It is well established that employers may require employees to wear a uniform while working, and it is also well established under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) that employees have the right to wear union buttons and insignia while working. These conflicting rights often create fights over the seemingly mundane question of what a company’s uniform policy may require and restrict. This recurring clash between a company’s control of its image, and an employee’s choice of wearing buttons, pins, or other items, most recently involved an In-N-Out Burger employee sporting a “Fight for $15” campaign button while on the job.

The three-member panel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decided unanimously that employees at In-N-Out cannot be prohibited from wearing buttons supporting the national “Fight for $15” campaign, despite the popular fast food chain’s uniform policy. The panel held that In-N-Out violated section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA by directing an employee to remove his “Fight for $15” button because the button did not comply with the company’s uniform policy.

The NLRA Also Applies to Non-Union Companies

Although many people operate under the misconception that the NLRA only applies to unionized companies or those involved in a union campaign, the Act protects more than the right to engage in union activities. It also protects the right of non-union employees to engage in concerted activities for their mutual aid and protection regarding the terms and conditions of their employment, such as their wage rates. Judge Keltner W. Locke found that the message on the button concerned wages, that the message was “clearly a term and condition of employment,” and that “the Act protected employees’ right to wear this button to the same extent it would have protected their right to wear a button referring to a union.”

Counsel for In-N-Out argued that the Act includes an exception for “special circumstances” which may justify prohibiting such pins. An employer that prohibits employees from wearing such insignia bears the burden of proving that such special circumstances do, in fact, exist. He stated that allowing employees to wear individualized pins impedes the company’s ability to further the image of unified and homogeneous staff in all of their locations.

Further, In-N-Out argued that allowing employees to wear unsanctioned buttons could pose health and safety concerns. But Judge Locke found none of these arguments persuasive, ruling that In-N-Out did not provide enough evidence to support their assertion that it fit into the “special circumstances” exception.

This case is a reminder to employers that seemingly innocuous managerial tasks, such as maintaining and enforcing uniform policy compliance, can have substantial legal implications. Employers should be very aware that even something as small as a lapel pin can be considered “protected activity,” and that even an otherwise sensible and valid uniform policy can draw scrutiny from the NLRB.

Filed Under: Labor Relations

Stephen R. McCutcheon

Steve’s clients rely upon him for practical ways to reduce exposure, avoid litigation, and make wise business decisions in the pursuit and defense of claims. He is sensitive to eliminating disruption so his clients can stay focused on their business rather than litigation. When litigation is unavoidable, Steve brings to the table 20 years of experience in labor, employment, construction, and constitutional law in California and federal courts, representing individuals, businesses, and associations. Read More

Primary Sidebar

Cook Brown LLP - Send me updates!

Send Me Updates!

Keep up with the ever-evolving challenges of California state and federal law in employment litigation, labor relations, prevailing wage, wage and hour, personnel policies, construction litigation, and workplace investigations.

Privacy Policy

Topics

Footer

Cook Brown, LLP

2407 J Street, Second Floor
Sacramento, CA 95816
(916) 442-3100

litigation-law-firm

  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • Google Maps

Search:

Copyright © 2023 Cook Brown LLP · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer · Site Design by Delos Incorporated

  • Home
  • About
  • People
  • Practices
  • Programs
  • Updates
  • Contact
  • Careers