Home Depot must remove from its platform an employee who resigned after refusing to remove a slogan supporting the Black Lives Matter movement, the National Labor Relations Board announced Wednesday after finding that the employee's actions were protected by federal law.
The pronounciation ruled by the National Labor Relations Board that Home Depot violated federal law in 2021 when it told employees to stop or use the letters “BLM,” an acronym for Black Lives Matter, that they had hand-drawn on their apron, had to remove.
The case is one of several that have focused on the issue of civil rights dress in the workplace following the police killing of George Floyd in May 2020, an episode that prompted many workers across the country to support the Black Lives Matter movement by showing their support. work uniforms or face masks.
The National Labor Relations Board said in its ruling that Antonio Morales Jr., who worked at a Home Depot store in the Minneapolis area, was protected by the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees employees' legal right to engage in 'coordinated activities'. 'for 'mutual assistance or protection'.
In its ruling, the federal agency said the employee's refusal to remove the “BLM” marking from their uniform was deemed “coordinated” and “for mutual aid or protection” due to employees' previous protests at the store over racial discrimination .
Lauren McFerran, president of the Labor Council, said in a rack On Wednesday, he said that “it is well established that workers have the right to work together to improve their working conditions – including by protesting racial discrimination in the workplace.”
She added: “It is equally clear that an employee who acts individually to support a group protest over a workplace issue remains protected under the law.”
Home Depot said in an emailed statement Wednesday that it disagreed with the Labor Board's decision.
“The Home Depot is fully committed to diversity and respect for all people,” the company said. “We will not tolerate any form of harassment or discrimination in the workplace.”
The company said in an email that it would review the full advice from the Labor Council in the coming days. It was unclear whether the company intended Antonio Morales Jr. immediately reinstated or appealed.
Home Depot can still appeal the Labor Board ruling to a federal appeals court.
The employee could not immediately be reached for comment on Wednesday. It was unclear whether they had an attorney.
Charlotte Garden, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, said in an interview Wednesday that the union's decision in the Home Depot case had the potential to set a precedent in similar labor board cases.
“This decision is extremely important as it sets out a number of principles for how the board will deal with these issues,” Ms Garden said.
Still, other cases will depend on their own individual facts, Ms. Garden said, adding that one distinction in the Home Depot case was that the employee wore the “BLM” marking on their uniform as part of an effort to draw attention on racial problems. discrimination in their store.
According to the labor board's order, the employee began wearing the “BLM” logo in August 2020, and sometime afterward they began talking to coworkers and supervisors in the store about “topics including ongoing discrimination and harassment.”
In one case highlighted in the Labor Board order, the employee was told by a coworker to closely monitor a black customer who was shopping in the store because the coworker said people of Somali descent were more likely to steal .
On February 18, 2021, Antonio Morales Jr. met with a Home Depot district manager who told them that wearing the “BLM” mark violated the company's dress code and that they were not allowed to wear the mark on their apron.
“I know that, and I am willing to be fired for this,” they said, according to a transcript of the meeting.
According to the Labor Council, Antonio Morales Jr. discharged the next day.
In addition to reinstating the employee, Home Depot was also ordered to return their wages, compensate them for any adverse tax consequences, and the store must also stop prohibiting its employees from engaging in “protected joint activities ', such as wearing black clothing. Lives Matter marker on an apron.