Miklin Enters., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 14-3099

Citation861 F.3d 812
Decision Date03 July 2017
Docket NumberNo. 14-3099, No. 14-3211,14-3099
Parties MIKLIN ENTERPRISES, INC., doing business as Jimmy John's, Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent Industrial Workers of the World, Intervenor National Labor Relations Board, Petitioner v. MikLin Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Jimmy John's, Respondent Industrial Workers of the World, Intervenor
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)

861 F.3d 812

MIKLIN ENTERPRISES, INC., doing business as Jimmy John's, Petitioner
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent

Industrial Workers of the World, Intervenor

National Labor Relations Board, Petitioner
v.
MikLin Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Jimmy John's, Respondent

Industrial Workers of the World, Intervenor

No. 14-3099
No. 14-3211

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: September 19, 2016
Filed: July 3, 2017


Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the petitioner/cross-respondent was Michael Arthur Landrum, of Edina, MN. The following attorney also appeared on the brief, Mary G. Dobbins, of Edina, MN.

Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the respondent/cross-petitioner was Joel Abraham Heller, NLRB, of Washington, DC. The following attorney also appeared on the brief, Kira D. Vol, NLRB, of Washington, DC.

Before RILEY, Chief Judge,* WOLLMAN, LOKEN, MURPHY, SMITH, COLLOTON, GRUENDER, BENTON, SHEPHERD, and KELLY, Circuit Judges, En Banc.

861 F.3d 815

LOKEN, Circuit Judge, with whom SMITH, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, RILEY, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges, join.

MikLin Enterprises, Inc. ("MikLin") petitions for review of a National Labor Relations Board ("Board") Order holding that MikLin violated Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA" or "the Act"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(1) and (3), when it (i) discharged and disciplined employees who publicly distributed posters suggesting that MikLin's "Jimmy John's" sandwiches posed a health risk to consumers; (ii) solicited employees to aid in removing the posters; (iii) encouraged employees to disparage a union supporter; and (iv) removed union literature from in-store bulletin boards. MikLin argues that the Board misapplied governing law and its decision is not supported by substantial evidence. The Board cross-petitions for enforcement of its Order. A divided panel enforced the Order in its entirety. We granted rehearing en banc and vacated the panel decision. We now conclude that the means the disciplined employees used in their poster attack were so disloyal as to exceed their right to engage in concerted activities protected by the NLRA, as construed in a controlling Supreme Court precedent, NLRB v. Local Union No. 1229, IBEW, 346 U.S. 464, 74 S.Ct. 172, 98 L.Ed. 195 (1953) ("Jefferson Standard "). We therefore decline to enforce the determination that MikLin violated the Act by disciplining and discharging those employees and by soliciting removal of the unprotected posters. We enforce the remainder of the Order, as so modified.

I. Background.

A. The "Sick Day Posters" Campaign. MikLin is a family enterprise that owns and operates ten Jimmy John's sandwich-shop franchises in the Minneapolis–St. Paul area. Michael Mulligan is president and co-owner; Robert Mulligan, his son, is vice-president. In 2007, several MikLin workers began an organizing campaign seeking representation by the Industrial Workers of the World ("IWW") union. The IWW lost a Board-conducted election in October 2010, filed unfair labor practice charges and objections to the election with the Board, and continued its organizing campaign by urging MikLin to provide employees holiday pay in late 2010. On January 10, 2011, MikLin and the IWW settled the IWW's objections. MikLin admitted no wrongdoing but agreed to a Board-conducted rerun election if the IWW filed for the election after sixty days but not later than after eighteen months.

With the holiday season passed, the IWW decided its next "march on the boss" group action would be to demand paid sick leave. The IWW concluded that the approach of flu season was a good time to raise the issue. At this time, MikLin's handbook required any employee who would be absent from a shift to find a replacement and notify the store manager. Rule 11 of Jimmy John's Rules for Employment, which employees received when hired, stated: "Find your own replacement if you are not going to be at work. We do not allow people to simply call in sick! We require our employees and [managers] to find their own replacement! NO EXCEPTIONS!" Failure to follow this procedure resulted in termination. MikLin did not offer paid leave for sick employees, though an employee with sufficient tenure was entitled to paid leave to care for a sick child.

Organizers of the IWW sick leave campaign began their attack in late January

861 F.3d 816

and early February 2011 by designing and posting on community bulletin boards in MikLin stores posters that prominently featured two identical images of a Jimmy John's sandwich. Above the first image were the words, "YOUR SANDWICH MADE BY A HEALTHY JIMMY JOHN'S WORKER." The text above the second image said, "YOUR SANDWICH MADE BY A SICK JIMMY JOHN'S WORKER." "HEALTHY" and "SICK" were in red letters, larger than the surrounding text in white. Below the pictures, white text asked: "CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE?" The response, in red and slightly smaller: "THAT'S TOO BAD BECAUSE JIMMY JOHN'S WORKERS DON'T GET PAID SICK DAYS. SHOOT, WE CAN'T EVEN CALL IN SICK." Below, in slightly smaller white text, was the warning, "WE HOPE YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM IS READY BECAUSE YOU'RE ABOUT TO TAKE THE SANDWICH TEST." Text at the bottom of the poster asked readers to help the workers win paid sick days by going to their website.

MikLin managers quickly removed the posters from store bulletin boards. On the morning of March 10—the day before the IWW could request a rerun election—IWW supporters distributed a press release, letter, and the sandwich poster to more than one hundred media contacts, including local newspapers and major news outlets such as the Associated Press, Reuters, Bloomberg, and NBC News. The press release highlighted "unhealthy company behavior." Its second sentence framed the message: "As flu season continues, the sandwich makers at this 10-store franchise are sick and tired of putting their health and the health of their customers at risk." The release declared: "According to findings of a union survey, Jimmy John's workers have reported having to work with strep throat, colds and even the flu." The release ended with a threat: if Robert and Michael Mulligan would not talk with IWW supporters about their demands for paid sick leave, the supporters would proceed with "dramatic action" by "plastering the city with thousands of Sick Day posters."

Employees attached to the press release a "sick leave letter" to the Mulligans which asserted that health code violations occur at MikLin stores nearly every day. The employees complained: "By working sick, we are jeopardizing the entirety of [the company's] image and risking public safety." The letter accused MikLin of refusing to put customers first, risking customers' health, and "shoving [customers] to the bottom of the well of importance." Like the press release, the letter concluded with a threat: if the Mulligans would not meet the employees' demands, the campaign would "move forward with [its] Sick Day posters by posting them not only in stores, but on the University's Campus, in hospitals, on street corners, and any other place where postings are common, citywide."

Also on March 10, four organizers met with Robert Mulligan. They told Mulligan that MikLin's attendance policy and low wages pressured employees to work while sick. Mulligan said MikLin was in the process of reforming its policies. The organizers provided Mulligan a printed version of their letter and press release and warned that, unless MikLin took action to fix the sick day policy within ten days, employees would display sandwich posters throughout the area. Employees who attended felt they had achieved some "common ground."

MikLin posted a new sick leave policy in each store on March 16. The new policy provided a sliding scale of disciplinary points for absences. An employee who did not report but found a replacement would receive no points. An absent employee who

861 F.3d 817

could not find a replacement but notified the store manager at least one hour before shift start would receive one point. An absent employee without a replacement who called less than one hour prior to shift start would receive two points. An absent employee who did not call the manager and did not find a replacement would receive three points. An employee who received four disciplinary points within a twelve-month period would be terminated. The policy emphasized: "With regard to absenteeism due to flu like symptoms, Team Members are not allowed to work unless and until those symptoms have subsided for 24 hours." Between March 10 and March 20, MikLin posted a notice in its stores reminding workers: "[f]or those who 'don't feel good' we have a policy that expects them to find a replacement for their shift.... [T]he record clearly shows that we have demonstrated flexibility with regard to excusing those who cannot find replacements."

On March 20, IWW supporters implemented their threat to plaster the city with a new version of the Sick Day posters they had placed in MikLin stores in January and February. The bottom of the publicly distributed posters incorporated one change: rather than asking for support of the employees' request for paid sick leave, the public posters listed Robert Mulligan's personal telephone number and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Me. Coast Reg'l Health Facilities
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • 26 Mayo 2021
    ...employer's labor practices, or indefensibly disparaged the quality of the employer's product or services." MikLin Enters., Inc. v. NLRB, 861 F.3d 812, 822 (8th Cir. 2017) (en banc).Young's letter focused on ongoing disputes between MCMH management and staff, thus satisfying the first prong ......
  • S. Bakeries, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 27 Septiembre 2017
    ...to engage in a spirited debate given the importance of the issues at stake. See, e.g. , MikLin Enterprises, Inc. v. NLRB , 861 F.3d 812, 837 (8th Cir. 2017) (en banc) (Kelly, J., dissenting) ("By limiting the content of employees' communications to attacks on the employer's labor practices ......
  • Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Noah's Ark Processors, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 22 Abril 2022
    ...Board stated that the Board is now focusing more on that Supreme Court interpretation of the NLRA. Cf. MikLin Enterprises, Inc. v. NLRB, 861 F.3d 812, 823-24 (8th Cir. 2017) (en banc).7 In response to the concurring opinion of Judge Stras, the plain language of Section 10(e) gives a court o......
  • Bowser v. Bd. of Trs., Police & Firemen's Ret. Sys.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • 13 Junio 2018
    ...Cir. 1996) (en banc), vacated on other grounds, 524 U.S. 11, 118 S.Ct. 1777, 141 L.Ed.2d 10 (1998). See also Miklin Enters., Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 861 F.3d 812, 823 (8th Cir. 2017) (noting that "[n]umerous prior court of appeals decisions have held that the Board's interpretation of judicial pr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • STRUCTURAL LABOR RIGHTS.
    • United States
    • Michigan Law Review Vol. 119 No. 4, February 2021
    • 1 Febrero 2021
    ...(388.) 29 U.S.C. [section] 158(a). (389.) Id. [section] 158(b). (390.) Id. [section] 160 (a)-(j). (391.) Id. [section] 160(1). (392.) 861 F.3d 812 (8th Cir. 2017). (393.) MikLin Enters., 861 F.3d 812. (394.) Id. at 815-16 (emphasis omitted). (395.) Id. (396.) Id. at 817. (397.) Id. at 818. ......
  • Achieving the Achievable: Realistic Labor Law Reform.
    • United States
    • Missouri Law Review Vol. 88 No. 2, March 2023
    • 22 Marzo 2023
    ..."disloyal, reckless or maliciously untrue" communications. Compare DirectTV, v. NLRB, 837 F.3d at 36 with MikLin Enterprises Inc. v. NLRB, 861 F.3d 812 (8th Cir. (255) See Food Lion v. United Food and Com. Workers Int'l Union, 103 F.3d 1007 (1997) (defining the corporate campaigns as encomp......
  • Nlra Case Notes
    • United States
    • California Lawyers Association California Labor & Employment Law Review (CLA) No. 31-5, September 2017
    • Invalid date
    ...Employees' "Sick Day" Posters Were Protected, Eighth Circuit, Sitting En Banc, Upholds Employees' Discipline MikLin Enters., Inc. v. NLRB, 861 F.3d 812 (8th Cir. 2017)The Eighth Circuit, sitting en banc, decided 8-2 that the employer did not violate the Act when it disciplined employees who......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT