Trouble with images? View as a Web page.

Facebook Twitter More...
Polsinelli Shughart PC Labor and Employment Law - Focus on Immigration
Labor and Employment Law Attorneys

W. Terrence Kilroy
Practice Area Chair

Anthony J. Romano
Practice Area Vice Chair

Carol C. Barnett
Jeffrey S. Bell
Gillian McKean Bidgood
Jon A. Bierman
Jill M. Borgonzi
Jack L. Campbell
Stacy A Carpenter
Jay M. Dade
Robert E. Entin
Sean R. Gallagher
Karen R. Glickstein
Marc D. Goldstein
Mark B. Grebel
Elizabeth T. Gross
Robert J. Hingula
JoAnne Spears Jackson
Christopher L. Johnson
Bradley G. Kafka
Jamie Zveitel Kwiatek
Alison P. Lungstrum
Chris M. Mason
Blair H. Moses
Eric E. Packel
William S. Robbins Jr.
Erin D. Schilling
James C. Sullivan
Christopher C. Swenson
Eric M. Trelz
Lynn G. Trevino-Legler
Johnny S. Wang
Mark W. Weisman
Judy Yi
Brian J. Zickefoose


To learn more
about our
Labor and Employment
group, click here


August 2012


Impact of Two Small Words Could be Significant:

"At-Will" in the NLRB Cross-Hairs


Appearing before a state bar association recently, the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") acting General Counsel, Lafe Solomon, said that the agency will seek to strike down at-will provisions in employment handbooks as a violation of section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA").

This appears to be part of the present NLRB's effort to provide greater leeway to employees in their dealings with employers and to counter the trend away from unionization. Many employment handbooks currently provide that employment is "at-will," meaning either the employer or the employee may terminate the employment relationship with or without cause at any time. Handbooks typically include an additional provision stating that at-will status cannot be changed except by a written agreement entered into by an employer official. It has been a longstanding tenet of most state law that absent a specific agreement to the contrary, employment is at-will, subject only to the requirement that the employer not base a termination on an illegal factor (e.g., race, age, sex, disability, union activities, or other specific factors set forth in federal and state law). In Mr. Solomon's view, an at-will provision violates the NLRA because it implies that concerted or union activities by employees to change at-will status would be futile, and that even organizing a union could have no bearing on an employee's at-will status.

Mr. Solomon's statements appear to reflect an emerging view within the NLRB on the issue of at-will provisions. In American Red Cross Arizona Blood Services Region, Case No. 28-CA-23443, decided February 1, 2012, an administrative law judge accepted the General Counsel's position that an at-will provision and the employee's acknowledgment that such status could not be changed except by a written agreement signed by a company official, amounted to an employee's relinquishment of the protected right to seek to change this status through collective or concerted action with other employees. The administrative law judge concluded that this provision unlawfully interfered with employees' rights under Section 7 of the NLRA to engage in concerted activity to improve wages, hours and working conditions. The administrative law judge reached this conclusion notwithstanding the testimony of the employee that he had in fact engaged in concerted activities.

The Red Cross decision is not an isolated instance of the NLRB's emerging effort against at-will provisions. Hyatt Hotels recently settled a case in which the following language was claimed by the NLRB's General Counsel to be unlawful:

  • I understand my employment is "at-will"
  • I acknowledge that no oral or written statements or representations regarding my employment can alter my at-will employment status, except for a written statement signed by me and . . . Hyatt's Executive Vice President . . .
  • The sole exception [to employer's right to change handbook and other policies] to this is the at-will status of my employment, which can only be changed in a writing signed by me and [Hyatt Executive].

As in Red Cross, this language was deemed by the General Counsel to be employer interference with employees' rights under Section 7 of the NLRA to engage in concerted or union activities to improve working conditions.

It should be noted that while Hyatt agreed to settle this case and change its policies on a nationwide basis, neither the NLRB itself nor any federal court has yet ruled on the validity of the General Counsel's position on at-will provisions. At this time, we encourage you to review your company's employment policies as they relate to at-will disclaimers, and to contact labor and employment counsel for further guidance. We will notify you of any new activities that might have significant impact.


For More Information


For questions or more information regarding this alert, contact the following attorneys:

  To learn more about our RSS feeds, click here. Click here to learn more about our RSS feeds. Click here to learn more about our RSS feeds.

Polsinelli Shughart | In the News

Headlines and Bylines from


Polsinelli Shughart New York Adds Trio of Intellectual Property Litigators to Enhance Pharmaceutical Patent Practice

Midwest Real Estate News Ranks Polsinelli Shughart Best of the Best 2012

Video: Impact of the Supreme Court Decision for Health Care Providers and Employers

Event: Labor, Employment & Benefits Symposium - 8.21.2012


Get more news from

Click here to learn more about our RSS feeds.



Connect with us on Facebook. Connect with us on Twitter. Connect with us on LinkedIn.

With more than 600 attorneys, Polsinelli Shughart is a national law firm and a recognized leader in the areas of health care, financial services, real estate, life sciences, energy and business litigation. Serving corporate, institutional and individual clients, the firm builds enduring relationships by creating value through our legal services – with passion, ingenuity and a sense of urgency. The firm can be found online at Polsinelli Shughart PC. In California, Polsinelli Shughart LLP.

Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Edwardsville, Jefferson City, Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York Overland Park, Phoenix, St. Joseph, St. Louis, Springfield, Topeka, Washington, D.C., Wilmington DE Redefining the business of law.  SM

To update your email preferences, please contact us at To opt out of these communications, click the unsubscribe link below.

Polsinelli Shughart provides this material for informational purposes only. The material provided herein is general and is not intended to be legal advice. Nothing herein should be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances, possible changes to applicable laws, rules and regulations and other legal issues. Receipt of this material does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Polsinelli Shughart is very proud of the results we obtain for our clients, but you should know that past results do not guarantee future results; that every case is different and must be judged on its own merits; and that the choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.

Polsinelli Shughart PC. In California, Polsinelli Shughart LLP.

Polsinelli Shughart® is a registered trademark of Polsinelli Shughart PC.

Copyright © 2012 Polsinelli Shughart PC ®.

Polsinelli Shughart PC Polsinelli Shughart PC Polsinelli Shughart PC