Free Trial / Sign Up Products / Prices / Samples About Us / Contact FAQs Home
Latest employment law cases 
Summaries and links to full text
LawMemo - First in Employment Law Emailed directly to you
and online all the time
Latest Cases Advanced Search Law Firm Directory Arbitrator Directory Law School Directory Legal Resources / Memos
Employment Law Memo
Arbitration Law Memo
NLRB Law Memo
Employment Low Blog
Arbitration Law Blog
Employment Law 101
Articles
Supreme Court Cases
EEOC Info
NLRB Info

LawMemo Employment Law Blog 
All Archives    |    All Archives By Topic 
Also read LawMemo Arbitration Blog


« Massachusetts plan not preempted by ERISA | Main | Bathroom peeping did not create hostile work environment »

State bar is NLRB-exempt
April 08, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

National Labor Relations Act Section 2(2) exempts political subdivisions from the NLRB's jurisdiction. Is the State Bar of New Mexico one of these? Yes (2-1).

State Bar of New Mexico (NLRB 03/24/2006).

The question is slightly more complex than one might think, simply because of the way the New Mexico State Bar is organized and operated.

It was originally established by statute to operate as an agency of the New Mexico Supreme Court. In 1978 the legislature revoked its statute, and the Supreme Court adopted a rule "continuing" the state bar, which then was organized as a non-profit corporation.

The NLRB split 2-1 along party lines. The two Republicans (Chairman Battista and Member Schaumber) found that the state bar is exempt because it was created by the state to constitute a department or administrative arm of the state government. They thought it was especially significant that the Supreme Court of new Mexico has the final say on almost everything the state bar does.

Member Walsh thought the focus should be more on the day-to-day operations, and the fact that the New Mexico Supreme Court has little or no control over personnel and labor relations issues.

My view:

  • This decision is an example of how the NLRB can split along political party lines.
  • I wonder why this case (a matter of first impression for the Board) was decided by a panel of three instead of the full Board. Perhaps they didn't think it was important enough.

LawMemo.Com


EEOC | NLRB | Supreme CourtEmployment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101

 
Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.