Texas Judge Blocks NLRB’s Union Claims Against Findhelp

man indicating no with a wave of his hand

A Texas federal judge has blocked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from pursuing union-related claims against tech startup Findhelp, potentially weakening labor protections nationwide.

At a Glance

U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman granted a temporary injunction against NLRB proceedings involving Findhelp
The ruling challenges the constitutionality of NLRB administrative law judges
Similar injunctions have been granted to other companies like SpaceX and Energy Transfer LP
Critics argue this decision could undermine workers’ rights and labor law enforcement

Court Ruling Halts NLRB Enforcement

In a significant blow to labor law enforcement, U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman has granted a temporary injunction preventing the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from proceeding with an unfair labor practices case against Findhelp, a tech startup. The ruling, issued on September 17, 2024, marks the third such injunction granted by a Trump-appointed judge in Texas, following similar decisions involving SpaceX and an Energy Transfer LP subsidiary.

Judge Pittman’s decision centers on the argument that NLRB administrative law judges have unconstitutional protections from dismissal by the White House. This ruling aligns with a growing trend of challenges to the NLRB’s structure by companies facing labor disputes.

Implications for Labor Rights

The injunction halts a hearing on allegations that Findhelp committed several unfair labor practices, including firing union organizers and surveilling union activities. This development has raised concerns among labor advocates about the potential weakening of workers’ rights to unionize and collectively bargain.

“The NLRB protects Americans’ right to unionize, fight unjust firings, and collectively bargain for higher wages,” said the U.S. Congressional Progressive Caucus. “Without it, employers can ignore labor laws and deprive workers of their rights. This is yet another move by a Trump-appointed judge in favor of wealthy corporations.”

A public benefits corporation won a court order preventing the NLRB from moving forward with an unfair labor practice case alleging it illegally fired a slew of union organizers. https://t.co/QYMHs9nSNV

— Bloomberg Law (@BLaw) September 18, 2024

Critics argue that such rulings could encourage other employers to seek similar injunctions, potentially undermining the NLRB’s ability to enforce labor laws effectively.

Broader Challenges to NLRB Authority

Findhelp’s case is part of a larger pattern of companies challenging the NLRB’s constitutional authority. Major corporations like Starbucks, Amazon, and Trader Joe’s have also raised similar arguments, claiming that the NLRB’s structure violates the president’s removal powers under Article II of the U.S. Constitution.

“Findhelp became the third company Monday to obtain a preliminary injunction halting NLRB enforcement from a Trump-appointed judge in Texas, following SpaceX and an Energy Transfer LP subsidiary.”

These challenges to the NLRB’s authority have found support among conservative judges, with Judge Pittman himself being a founding member of the Federalist Society’s Fort Worth chapter. However, it’s worth noting that two federal judges appointed by Obama and Biden have recently rejected similar corporate challenges, potentially setting the stage for a future U.S. Supreme Court case.

The Road Ahead

As the debate over the NLRB’s constitutionality continues, the agency faces an uncertain future. The outcome of these legal challenges could have far-reaching implications for labor rights and the balance of power between employers and employees in the United States.

The @NLRB protects Americans' right to unionize, fight unjust firings, & collectively bargain for higher wages. Without it, employers can ignore labor laws & deprive workers of their rights.

This is yet another move by a Trump-appointed judge in favor of wealthy corporations. https://t.co/gE1bqGvcH1

— Progressive Caucus (@USProgressives) September 17, 2024

For now, workers and unions will be watching closely as similar cases make their way through the courts, potentially reshaping the landscape of labor law enforcement in America.