Published
June 17, 2024
Back in November of 2022, a New York federal judge ordered Amazon to reinstate a worker it had let go from its fulfillment center in Staten Island. The individual in question had been let go in 2020 after berating a co-worker in a parking lot outside the facility, using some choice language like calling her a “gutter b--ch,” a “crack ho” and “queen of the swamp” among other things. These insults were yelled into a megaphone to amplify their impact. Reasonable people would agree that this sort of behavior merits being fired.
The New York judge disagreed, however, and ordered the company to cease and desist from “retaliating” against any worker engaged in what she called “workplace activism.” But that is not the end of the story.
On June 12, 2024, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals threw out the cease and desist order, saying that the District judge had not explained why the order was “just and proper” and that the District court had “abused its discretion.” The case is important not just because it illustrates again how the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) wants to allow profanity and harassment in the workplace, but also because it coincides with a Supreme Court ruling that found the NLRB needs to adhere to a higher standard when requesting injunctions.
While the two rulings overall are good for workers and employers, they still do not address the issue of why the NLRB wants to allow foul and offensive speech at work. Few would want to work at, or patronize, an establishment that allows such conduct. All the more reason to question whether the NLRB’s chair deserves another term.
About the authors
Glenn Spencer
Spencer oversees the Chamber’s work on immigration, retirement security, traditional labor relations, human trafficking, wage hour and worker safety issues, EEOC matters, and state labor and employment law.
