In a settlement that says something about the Internet and unions, a National Labor Relations Board official convinced a leading D.C.-area publisher to admit it can't discriminate against its union's use of e-mail to inform members of the status of negotiations.

In a December 6 settlement, the agency's acting Maryland-D.C. regional director told the Bureau of National Affairs it broke labor law "when it prohibited the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild from sending bargaining bulletins via the BNA e-mail system," says TNG Local 32035.

BNA's rule "that prohibits all non-business use of the e-mail system at all times," was "overly broad," the settlement said--especially since, according to the unfair labor practices charge filed in March, BNA enforced its rule selectively.

"While BNA stripped the Guild of the ability to communicate promptly with unit members, BNA itself continued to issue frequent and lengthy e-mail bargaining spin-bulletins to all employees, often just minutes after the close of bargaining sessions," the Guild said.

"BNA also allowed extensive use of its e-mail system for advertisements for health club memberships, cell phone marketing, and basketball pool betting--cracking down only on the Guild for communicating on wages, hours, and working conditions," it added.

Settlement may affect other workplaces
The settlement applies to BNA, said TNG Local Representative Lori Calderone. But NLRB General Counsel Leonard Page included it, though not by name, in a recent roundup of labor cases involving e-mail.

Based on previous cases, NLRB called BNA's rule "overbroad," Page said. "E-mail messages may be similar to oral solicitations because they're expected to occasion a response," and are covered by labor law's free-speech guarantees. "E-mail allows the reader to talk back. This ability to exchange ideas and discuss action is the key to effective preservation of labor rights," he added.

"We also think the notice" NLRB required BNA to post "ought to tell what the status quo was and how BNA disrupted it," but the agency didn't agree, Calderone noted. "They clearly discriminated against the union. I don't know why they don't say that" in the settlement.

Still, the decision is notable because other employers try to block union communications over the Internet.

This article was written by Press Associates, Inc., news service. Used with permission.