Union organizing drives dealt a blow by Supreme Court

The Lechmere case is important because it reaffirms that employers' property rights take precedence over the rights of nonemployees to engage in union organizing on employers' property. This is particularly important for hospitals and health care institutions because of their heightened exposure to union organizing activity after American Hospital Association v. National Labor Relations Board, discussed above. Providers should, however, remember two points. First, the principal focus of Lechmere was on union organizing by nonemployees; nothing in Lechmere limited the basic right of employees to form and join labor unions as guaranteed by Section 7 of the NLRA. Additionally, Lechmere notwithstanding, providers must be careful not to discriminate in their approach to union organizing activities--even by nonemployees. Thus, if a provider allows nonemployee groups other than unions to enter upon its property for purposes of soliciting employees and/or distributing literature, any attempt to bar nonemployee union organizers from the property would probably be deemed discriminatory and could indeed be an unfair labor practice. (In Lechmere, the employer consistently enforced a ban against all such nonemployee groups.)