Thread regarding Capital One layoffs

C1 severance agreements cannot ask for employees to waive their labor rights and freedom of speech in EXCHANGE FOR RECEIVING SEVERANCE AGREEMENT

This is the National Labor Relations Board announcement for federal enforcement in stopping companies from offering severance benefits, in exchange for employees to waive their labor rights and their freedom of speech to talk negatively of the company.

https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/board-rules-that-employers-may-not-offer-severance-agreements-requiring

Board Rules that Employers May Not Offer Severance Agreements Requiring Employees to Broadly Waive Labor Law Rights
Office of Public Affairs
202-273-1991
publicinfo@nlrb.gov
www.nlrb.gov

February 21, 2023
Today, the Board issued a decision in McLaren Macomb, returning to longstanding precedent holding that employers may not offer employees severance agreements that require employees to broadly waive their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The decision involved severance agreements offered to furloughed employees that prohibited them from making statements that could disparage the employer and from disclosing the terms of the agreement itself.

The decision reverses the previous Board’s decisions in Baylor University Medical Center and IGT d/b/a International Game Technology, issued in 2020, which abandoned prior precedent in finding that offering similar severance agreements to employees was not unlawful, by itself.

Today’s decision, in contrast, explains that simply offering employees a severance agreement that requires them to broadly give up their rights under Section 7 of the Act violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. The Board observed that the employer’s offer is itself an attempt to deter employees from exercising their statutory rights, at a time when employees may feel they must give up their rights in order to get the benefits provided in the agreement.

“It’s long been understood by the Board and the courts that employers cannot ask individual employees to choose between receiving benefits and exercising their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Today’s decision upholds this important principle and restores longstanding precedent,” said Chairman Lauren McFerran.

Members Wilcox and Prouty joined Chairman McFerran in issuing the decision. Member Kaplan dissented.

Established in 1935, the National Labor Relations Board is an independent federal agency that protects employees from unfair labor practices and protects the right of private sector employees to join together, with or without a union, to improve wages, benefits and working conditions. The NLRB conducts hundreds of workplace elections and investigates thousands of unfair labor practice charges each year.

by
| 1402 views | | 7 replies (last February 12, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1qRhoq03

7 replies (most recent on top)

I was aware of this decision when I was laid off last year and looked through the severance agreement and there was no non-disparagement clause or waiving of labor rights present. There seem to be lots of differences in these severance agreements (I got 5 months severance and others got less than that), so I would definitely recommend everyone be aware of this decision and to read their severance agreement carefully if they get laid off.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bzvw+1qRhoq03

Thanks to the original poster. If those dogs force you to sign you know it's illegal. So sign it to get the money. Then break the agreement because it's illegal and unenforceable. F# Capone.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3cjf+1qRhoq03

Again, “from my experience”. I was redeployed due to job elimination and not performance. Luckily, I was hired for a different position at the last minute and never signed the severance agreement.

There’s language in there that addresses not sharing proprietary information, which aligns with employment agreements that we all signed when joining the company.

I did not see a severance contingency re: sharing opinions about my employment experience. Maybe the hear/say confusion is coming from the proprietary practices and information piece. Severances are paid in a lump sum so it doesn’t even make sense. They’re not going to send you a bill to pay it back if you tell other people how much you hate capital one.

But, if you’re a low performer looking for a reason to be mad then go ahead and take this as a win.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cal+1qRhoq03

Two previous coworkers of mine had to sign something saying they could never come back to the company and could not talk about there experience, before they could get severance.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cdq+1qRhoq03

Mine signed away all rights, except those explicitly protected by the labor board; with no further compensation allowed. Additionally, you could not talk about your experiences. #Union

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wzb+1qRhoq03

To the last poster, severance agreements has waivers at Capone for not talking about those skunks poorly and release of all liabilities.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gcc+1qRhoq03

From my experience, Capital One severance agreements don’t have any contingencies like what’s described. Once your employment is severed you can freely share your opinions. If you’re in an opt out period you’re still employed and bound to professionalism expectations.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kmc+1qRhoq03

Post a reply

: