Employers across the country were suddenly forced to address the issue of political advocacy in the workplace when rallies were held on May 1 of last year to protest U.S. immigration policies. Workers left their jobs to take part, and both employers and the National Labor Relations Board were uncertain about how to respond. Were these work stoppages protected by the National Labor Relations Act, and, if so, to what extent? There were no definitive answers.

Further, as we approach this presidential election season, political passions are rising to a fever pitch, and some of these issues may spill over into the workplace. Hot button issues such as immigration, health care, and spiraling costs of food and gasoline can flow into the workplace as employees wear buttons, circulate petitions, engage in rallies, send emails, blog, or post messages on websites. What can and should an employer do to limit the effect of such actions on productivity and morale?

On July 22, 2008, NLRB General Counsel Ronald Meisburg issued guidelines describing a framework that the Board will use in analyzing ULP charges involving discipline of
employees who engage in political advocacy. The General Counsel's Memorandum, which was a response to the Board's treatment of ULPs resulting from demonstrations
surrounding immigration legislation, is intended to assist employers, employees, and unions in determining what kind of political activity is protected by the "mutual aid or
protection clause of Section 7 of the NLRA, and what actions employers may take to ensure a productive workplace.

Click here to read the entire article.