SCOTUS clips NLRB's wings

The US Supreme Court has clipped the NLRB's wings when it comes to seeking preliminary injunctions under NLRA §10(j). Starbucks v. McKinney (US S. Ct. 06/13/2024) [PDF].

The NLRB started its normal administrative process to determine whether Starbucks committed an unfair labor practice. The NLRB claimed that Starbucks unlawfully discharged multiple employees who had invited a news crew from a local television station to visit the store after hours to promote their unionizing effort.

The Board's regional director also brought suit in federal district court seeking a preliminary injunction for the duration of the administrative proceedings that would, among other things, require Starbucks to reinstate the fired employees.

The district court granted the injunction, the 6th Circuit affirmed, but the Supreme Court unanimously reversed.

The district court applied a two-part test that asks (1) whether “there is reasonable cause to believe that unfair labor practices have occurred,” and (2) whether injunctive relief is “just and proper.”

The Supreme Court ruled that the NLRB must satisfy the traditional four-part test: (1) that it is likely to succeed on the merits, (2) that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, (3) that the balance of equities tips in its favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest.