Which case reaffirmed previous rulings concerning compensation by the NLRB?

Which case reaffirmed previous rulings concerning compensation by the NLRB?

• A. Electromation Inc. 1992
• B. Keeler Brass Automotive 1995
• C. Smith v. Jones
• D. Johnson Corp. v. United States

Answer: (B)

The case that reaffirmed previous rulings concerning compensation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is Keeler Brass Automotive from 1995. This case is significant as it helped to clarify and reaffirm the standards related to employer compensation practices in the context of union activities and labor relations. The NLRB’s previous rulings had established foundational principles regarding how employers should interact with unionized employees, particularly in terms of wage and benefits discussions. In this case, the NLRB found that certain compensation practices could violate the National Labor Relations Act if they were aimed at undermining union organization or activities. This reaffirmation reinforced the board's stance that employers must maintain a neutral approach regarding employee choices for union representation and collective bargaining, ensuring that they don't use compensation as a tool to conflict with or intimidate labor organization efforts. The other options represent different cases with varying focuses and outcomes, but Keeler Brass Automotive specifically addresses the NLRB's approach to compensation in relation to labor relations, making it the correct choice in this context.

The case that reaffirmed previous rulings concerning compensation by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is Keeler Brass Automotive from 1995. This case is significant as it helped to clarify and reaffirm the standards related to employer compensation practices in the context of union activities and labor relations. The NLRB’s previous rulings had established foundational principles regarding how employers should interact with unionized employees, particularly in terms of wage and benefits discussions.

In this case, the NLRB found that certain compensation practices could violate the National Labor Relations Act if they were aimed at undermining union organization or activities. This reaffirmation reinforced the board's stance that employers must maintain a neutral approach regarding employee choices for union representation and collective bargaining, ensuring that they don't use compensation as a tool to conflict with or intimidate labor organization efforts.

The other options represent different cases with varying focuses and outcomes, but Keeler Brass Automotive specifically addresses the NLRB's approach to compensation in relation to labor relations, making it the correct choice in this context.