MasTec Advanced Technologies
National Labor Relations Board
357 NLRB 103 (2011)
- Written by Kelsey Libby, JD
Facts
Advanced Technologies (Advanced) (defendant), a division of MasTec, Inc. (defendant) provided satellite TV installation services for DirectTV, Inc. (defendant). Advanced implemented a new rule that reduced compensation when an employee installing satellite TV was unable to persuade customers to also purchase telephone line hookups. After multiple meetings in which employees objected to the new rule, a group of 26 satellite TV technicians (the technicians) (plaintiffs) employed by Advanced appeared on a local TV news broadcast to discuss the dispute. The technicians discussed the pay rule, as well as certain objectionable sales techniques. For instance, the technicians discussed how they were essentially told to lie to customers in order to secure sales of additional services. Advanced fired several employees for their participation in the news broadcast. The technicians filed charges with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging that their termination violated § 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. An administrative law judge (ALJ) held that the technicians’ conduct was not protected by the act, and the general counsel filed exceptions to that portion of the ALJ’s decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Liebman, Becker, J.J.)
Concurrence (Becker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.