Skip to main content

NLRB v. Columbia College Chicago

7th CircuitFebruary 2, 2017No. 16-2026
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Hamilton concurs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Failure to Accommodate

Outcome

The Seventh Circuit granted Columbia College's petition for review in part and denied the NLRB's enforcement application in part, vacating and remanding portions of the NLRB's order regarding effects bargaining and bargaining expenses while enforcing other aspects of the Board's decision.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** Columbia College Chicago made changes that affected its employees without properly negotiating with their union first. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) investigated and found that the college had violated workers' rights by not following proper procedures when making these workplace changes. The college disagreed with the NLRB's findings and asked a federal appeals court to review the decision. **What the Court Decided** The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mixed ruling. The court agreed with some of the NLRB's findings against Columbia College but disagreed with others. Specifically, the court sent back parts of the case dealing with "effects bargaining" (negotiating about the consequences of workplace changes) and bargaining expenses for further review. However, the court upheld other portions of the NLRB's decision that favored the workers. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case reinforces that employers must properly negotiate with unions before making significant workplace changes. While the mixed outcome shows that these cases can be complex, it demonstrates that workers have legal protections when employers try to bypass union negotiations. The ruling helps clarify the boundaries of what employers must discuss with unions.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Columbia College Chicago v. National Labor Relations Board
7th CircuitFeb 2017
Mixed Result
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win
James Chappel v. Laboratory Corporation of America, AKA National Health Lab
9th CircuitNov 2000
Mixed Result

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.