Earlier this month, the NLRB issued a 3-1 ruling in Miller & Anderson, Inc. and Tradesman Intāl and Sheet Metal Workers Intāl Assān, Local Union No. 19 (āMillerā)1 that allows union representation of a single bargaining unit combining temporary workers and permanent employees without the consent of the staffing agency that supplies the temporary workers.
This holding overrules the Boardās 2004 decision in Oakwood Care Center (āOakwoodā)2, which prevented union representation of a single āmixedā unit combining the temporary and permanent workers without consent from all affected employers. The Miller decision effectively reinstates the Boardās 2000 ruling in M.B. Sturgis, Inc. (āSturgisā)3 that permits union representation of a single unit containing temporary and permanent employees without the staffing agencyās consent so long as the unit employees share a ācommunity of interest.ā Whether workers share a ācommunity of interestā requires an analysis of several factors, including the temporary workersā and permanent employeesā job duties, wages, hours, skills, training, working conditions, and common supervision.
Under the new Miller decision, staffing companies and their corporate clients having a workforce with a community of interest may be required to collaborate respecting union bargaining. This obligation requires āuserā employers to bargain over terms and conditions of employment with permanent employees and the āsupplierā employerās employees. It also requires the āsupplierā employer to bargain over terms and conditions of employment with its employees supplied to the āuserā employer.
In light of the Miller decision, āuserā employers and āsupplierā employers should review their policies, practices, and workplace arrangements to determine whether a community of interest exists between their temporary and permanent employees. If a community of interest potentially exists, the staffing firm and its client should be aware that the Miller decision may permit the temporary employees to receive the same terms and conditions of employment as the permanent employees within the shared community of interest. This is a complex and fact intensive area of the law and, accordingly, we advise consulting legal counsel to determine how to best proceed.
āThis article contains highlights of the decision and is not intended to be legal advice.
