Judge Brad Garcia, nominated by President Biden to the DC Circuit Circuit court of appeals, wrote a 2-1 decision that upheld and enforced an NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) finding that a New York hotel owner had improperly refused to bargain with a union on wages and other economic issues. Judge Judith Rogers, who was nominated by President Clinton, joined the decision, to which Trump judge Naomi Rao dissented. The July 2024 decision was in Troutbrook Company LLC v NLRB.
What is the background of this case?
Investment company Troutbrook Company LLC owns and operates a hotel in New York City. After the hotel’s employees voted to unionize in 2018, it unsuccessfully challenged the union and the NLRB had to order it to bargain with the union as required by law.
Troutbrook and the union held 12 sessions to negotiate the initial collective bargaining agreement in 2019-21. Throughout this time, Troutbrook “resolutely” refused to discuss subjects that the law specifically requires to be negotiated in good faith, including “wages, health benefits, and retirement benefits.”
In 2021-22, the NLRB considered the matter. The Board decided that Troutbrook’s “refusal to bargain over economic subjects” violated the law and constituted an unfair labor practice. Troutbrook petitioned the DC Circuit for review, while the NLRB requested enforcement of its order.
How did Judge Garcia and the DC Circuit Rule and Why is it Important?
Judge Garcia wrote a 2-1 decision that upheld the NLRB and ordered Troutbrook to comply with its legal obligation to bargain in good faith on wages and other economic subjects. Garcia carefully reviewed the relevant case law and the detailed history of the case. He noted that Troutbrook refused to have any discussions on economic issues until the parties had resolved all non-economic issues, such as restrictions on strikes and lockouts, a position that the NLRB has previously found improper.
Garcia specifically rejected dissenting judge Rao’s assertion that the NLRB was claiming that an “initial” refusal to discuss economic terms was an unfair labor practice. He explained that the record showed that “throughout the entire course of bargaining” Troutbrook refused to discuss economic issues and continued to insist on resolving all non-economic issues first, even after it “became apparent that its approach was obstructing” negotiations.
Judge Garcia’s opinion is obviously important to the rights of the hotel workers at Troutbrook’s New York hotel. It also sets an important precedent that upholds workers’ rights and that recognizes the impropriety of efforts like Troutbrook’s to undermine those rights. The ruling also serves as a reminder of the importance of promptly confirming fair-minded judges to our federal courts.