It's no wonder that organizedlabor was hostile to Kavanaugh's nomination; the judge has oftensided with employers in disputes with unions. (Photo: ChipSomodevilla/Pool via Bloomberg)

|

If the bitter fight between Democrats and Republicans overBrett Kavanaugh's nomination to the SupremeCourt didn't make it clear, the newest member of the high court isexpected to be a reliable member of the court's five-memberconservative bloc.

|

But what does that mean, specifically, from the perspective ofemployers? Kavanaugh's record as a judge generally tilts infavor of employers, although he has on occasiondelivered decisions that have favored employees.

|

Related: Where does Brett Kavanaugh stand on health careissues?

|

It's no wonder that organized labor was hostile to Kavanaugh'snomination. The judge has often sided with employers in disputes with unions.

|

As a member of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District ofColumbia, Kavanaugh joined a ruling in favor of an employer thathad disciplined customer-facing employees who had worn uniont-shirts on the job that disparaged the employer, AT&T.Although federal law typically protects the rights of workers towear union garb at work, Kavanaugh wrote that there were reasonableexceptions if the employer believed the clothing was harming itsimage.

|

In a case where his colleagues ruled that undocumented workershave the same collective bargaining rights as other employees,Kavanaugh dissented, writing that federal union protections do notnecessarily extend to undocumented immigrants.

|

In another union-related case that likely improved his chancesof serving on the Supreme Court far more than he realized at thetime, Kavanaugh ruled in favor of the Trump Organization, agreeingwith the company that a union election should be overturned becauseit had been unfairly biased by politicians.

|

In 2007, the court of appeals ruled in favor of a union that hadaccused a furniture manufacture of creating a separate corporateentity to evade unionization. Kavanaugh dissented.

|

Kavanaugh also dissented in a 2016 case where the court upheld afinding by OSHA against SeaWorld after one of its killer-whaleskilled two trainers. While the majority concluded that OSHA hadreasonably determined that SeaWorld had not taken necessaryprecautions to provide a safe work environment for their employees,Kavanaugh argued that the trainers had chosen a dangerousprofession and that the majority was straying from its authority intrying to protect people from themselves.

|

One notable exception to the trend is an opinion from Kavanaughregarding employment discrimination. In 2013, Kavanaughjoined the majority in ruling in favor of an employee who sued hisformer employer, Fannie Mae, alleging that he had been unfairlytreated on the basis of race. The plaintiff, who is AfricanAmerican, specifically alleged that a supervisor had called him then-word.

|

“It may be difficult to fully catalogue the various verbalinsults and epithets that by themselves could create a hostile workenvironment,” wrote Kavanaugh. “And there may be close cases at themargins. But, in my view, being called the n-word by asupervisor—as Ayissi-Etoh alleges happened to him—suffices byitself to establish a racially hostile work environment.”

|

Read more about the current regulatoryenvironment:

Complete your profile to continue reading and get FREE access to BenefitsPRO, part of your ALM digital membership.

  • Critical BenefitsPRO information including cutting edge post-reform success strategies, access to educational webcasts and videos, resources from industry leaders, and informative Newsletters.
  • Exclusive discounts on ALM, BenefitsPRO magazine and BenefitsPRO.com events
  • Access to other award-winning ALM websites including ThinkAdvisor.com and Law.com
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.