Aug 13 (Reuters) - The National Labor Relations Board
has told a federal appeals court that a recent U.S. Supreme
Court ruling barring certain in-house agency enforcement
proceedings has no effect on its powers to remedy illegal labor
practices.
The board in a brief filed on Monday with the 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in a case involving Macy's said the
high court's June ruling in Jarkesy v. U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission did not disturb a Supreme Court decision
from the 1930s upholding the NLRB's then-novel structure.
The Supreme Court in Jarkesy said the SEC's practice of
imposing fines in administrative cases involving financial fraud
violated the U.S. Constitution's guarantee to a trial by jury.
The board in Monday's brief said ensuring that workers are
made fully whole for costs they incur as the result of illegal
firings and other employer misconduct is distinct from the
punitive damages levied by the SEC and other agencies.
"Such relief does not punish bad actors, but rather
implements the statutory principles of rectifying the harms
actually incurred by the victims of the unfair labor practices,"
board lawyers wrote.
But Macy's, which is appealing an NLRB decision that found
the retailer illegally locked out workers after a strike, said
in a dueling brief on Monday that Jarkesy applies to any claims
that evolved out of common law including those involving illegal
firings, which are akin to wrongful termination claims.
The decades-old Supreme Court precedent cited by the board
only involved back pay and not the more expansive money remedies
the NLRB has sought in recent years, the company said.
"The Board addresses the legality of union activity (and
employer responses) through the lens of [federal labor law] just
as the common law did through claims such as breach of contract,
interference with business relations, and conspiracy," Macy's
lawyers wrote.
The 9th Circuit, which heard oral arguments in the case in
March, had asked last month for supplemental briefs on the
impact of Jarkesy. The panel includes 9th Circuit Judges
Jacqueline Nguyen and Patrick Bumatay and Federal Circuit Judge
Evan Wallach, who is sitting by designation.
The Supreme Court decision only directly impacts the SEC,
but is widely expected to lead courts to block other agencies
from handing down penalties in administrative cases. Last week,
Comcast filed a lawsuit claiming that U.S. Department of Labor
proceedings in cases involving financial whistleblower claims
are unconstitutional.
Federal labor law only allows the NLRB to impose remedies
that make workers subjected to unlawful conduct whole and does
not allow for statutory penalties, but the board in recent years
has attempted to expand them.
In a 2022 decision in the case Thryv Inc, the board said it
would begin ordering employers to reimburse workers for
financial harms tied directly to unlawful labor practices, such
as out-of-pocket medical expenses and credit card fees incurred
by workers as a result of being illegally fired.
The NLRB cited Thryv in Macy's case and ordered the company
to pay workers for any "direct or foreseeable" monetary harms.
The New Orleans-based 5th Circuit in May threw out the Thryv
ruling, but it did so on the merits of the board's decision and
did not address the broader issue of remedies.
The case is Macy's Inc v. NLRB, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, No. 23-150.
For the NLRB: Usha Dheenan and Barbara Sheehy
For the union: David Rosenfeld of Weinberg, Roger &
Rosenfeld
For Macy's: Laura Ann Pierson-Scheinberg of Jackson Lewis
Read more:
US court weighs impact on NLRB of Supreme Court ruling on
agency powers
NLRB ruling that expanded money damages for workers rejected
by 5th Circuit
SEC in-house judges violate right to jury trial, appeals
court rules
US Supreme Court faults SEC's use of in-house judges in
latest curbs on agency powers
NLRB GC directs staff to seek expansive remedies for workers
Workers entitled to more money from employers who break the
law - labor board
(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York)