ABC April 17 celebrated a victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit blocked implementation of the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) “employee rights” notice posting rule, which was scheduled to go into effect April 30. Under the rule, employers would have been required to display a poster in their workplace that contained a biased and incomplete list of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act. 

On March 5, the ABC-led Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) appealed a ruling by a U.S. District Court judge who found that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has the authority to mandate its biased “employee rights” poster.  

On March 5, the ABC-led Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW) appealed a ruling by a U.S. District Court judge who found that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has the authority to mandate its biased “employee rights” poster.  

On March 2, a U.S. District Court issued a decision in the legal challenge against the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) biased “employee rights” notice posting requirement, ruling that the NLRB has the authority to mandate the notice posting itself, but it cannot impose an up-front, blanket penalty policy for failure to post.

On March 2, a U.S. District Court issued a decision in the legal challenge against the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) biased “employee rights” notice posting requirement, ruling that the NLRB has the authority to mandate the notice posting itself, but it cannot impose an up-front, blanket penalty policy for failure to post.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Sept. 28 decided that an Ohio contractor violated employee rights by challenging a job targeting program in a state court. 

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) Sept. 28 decided that an Ohio contractor violated employee rights by challenging a job targeting program in a state court. 

As part of the Employers for Flexibility in Health Care (EFHC) coalition, ABC Sept. 27 submitted comments regarding implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) – specifically, on determining full-time employee status and the application of the 90-day waiting period limitation. The comment letter was submitted in response to notices issued by the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

As part of the Employers for Flexibility in Health Care (EFHC) coalition, ABC Sept. 27 submitted comments regarding implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) – specifically, on determining full-time employee status and the application of the 90-day waiting period limitation. The comment letter was submitted in response to notices issued by the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

ABC, as part of the Employers for Flexibility in Health Care (EFHC) coalition, submitted comments on provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) regarding the health insurance premium tax credit; eligibility determinations and exchange standards for employers; and the health coverage affordability safe harbor for employers.