Google Will Appeal NLRB’s Joint Employer Ruling

On April 8, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that Google was a joint employer with Accenture Flex and ordered it to bargain with Alphabet Workers Union-Communications Workers of America, Local 9009. 

“We have no objection to these Accenture employees electing to form a union, but as Google is not their employer, we should not be involved in collective bargaining,” Google said in a statement. 

Board Ruling

The NLRB found otherwise.  

On Nov. 27, 2023, the NLRB’s regional director had certified the union as the exclusive collective bargaining representative of employees in the following unit: All full-time and regular part-time employees working remotely in the U.S. in the employer’s Google Content Creation Operation, including employees in the following classifications — junior writer, launch coordinator, lead writer, process excellence specialist, senior quality assurance specialist, senior visual design, analyst, senior writer, technical writer, and visual design analyst. The union excluded temporary employees, seasonal employees, confidential employees, managers, guards, and supervisors as defined by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). 

On Dec. 11, 2023, Oct. 4, 2024, and Dec. 17, 2024, the union requested that Google bargain with the union as the exclusive collective bargaining representative. Since about Oct. 11, 2024, Google has refused to recognize and bargain with the union. On Nov. 22, 2024, the board denied Google’s requests for review of the regional director’s decision. 

HR Q&A: Understanding NLRA Compliance

Google asserted that the board erred in finding that Google exercised sufficient control over Accenture Flex’s employees to support a finding of joint employer status, the board noted. Since the certification of the union, Google no longer maintains wage or benefits standards for Accenture Flex, so a critical factor supporting the board’s finding of joint employer status is no longer accurate, Google maintained.  

The board emphasized that while this change allegedly occurred in July 2024, Google did not seek to reopen the record in this case or apprise the board of current circumstances before the board issued its order in November 2024.

“The joint employer status of the respondents was fully litigated and resolved in the underlying representation proceeding,” the NLRB noted. “The respondent has not presented any newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence. Evidence of changed circumstances after the time of the hearing in the underlying representation case does not constitute newly discovered and previously unavailable evidence. … [T]he board has long held that in the absence of newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence or special circumstances, a respondent in a proceeding alleging a violation of Section 8(a)(5) [of the NLRA] is not entitled to relitigate issues which were or could have been litigated in a prior representation proceeding.”

NLRA Provisions

Under Sections 8(d) and 8(a)(5) of the NLRA, employers have a legal duty to bargain in good faith with their employees’ representative and to sign any collective bargaining agreement they reach, according to the board. 

Section 8(d) of the act sets forth what the duty to bargain collectively encompasses. Section 8(a)(5) of the act makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of its employees. 

HR Q&A: What You Need to Know About Collective Bargaining Agreements 

The NLRB held that Google had engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of the NLRA by refusing to recognize and bargain with the union.

“We will appeal the decision as Google does not control the employment terms or conditions of these Accenture workers,” the company said in a statement.