Even though the company’s handbook did not explicitly prohibit employees from discussing their wages or other terms and conditions of employment, the National Labor Relations Board was correct in concluding that the handbook’s confidentiality language created an “unqualified prohibition” of the release of “any information” concerning its employees, which could be reasonably construed by its workers to restrict discussions about wages and other terms and conditions of employment, the D.C. Circuit affirms. The handbook’s discipline section had warned employees that they may be sanctioned for violating a confidence or releasing confidential information without authorization. Cintas Corp. v. NLRB.

A security guard company distributed an employee handbook containing work rules prohibiting employees from 1) complaining to clients, 2) solicitation and distribution of literature “at all times while on duty or in uniform,” and 3) fraternizing on or off duty with other employees. All three rules violate federal labor law which makes it an unfair labor practice for employers to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in exercise of their right to organize and enlist support, according to the Court. Guardsmark, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board