More on Judge John Roberts' Decisions in Labor and Employment Cases
by Michael Fox
Superceded: Click here for A More Complete List of Judge John Roberts' Labor and Employment Related Decisions.
In addition to the two opinions mentioned in my prior post, a quick (which means it may not be complete) search found 27 decisions that Judge Roberts participated in on the D.C. Circuit. I have provided a brief description of the Court's actions, Judge Roberts role in the decision and characterized it as either for the employee or employer position. Althought that is a very arbitrary way of looking at decisions, it still shows that Judge Roberts has certainly not been one sided. In fact what is more notable is the number of times Judge Roberts sided with the employee's position in reversing a lower court or agency. Most, although not all, of his rulings that favored employers were in agreement with the court or agency below.
- Ramaprakash v. Federal Aviation Administration, 346 F.3d 1121 (10/21/2003). 3-0 Panel. Roberts' opinion. Reversing FAA action against employee. Employee
- Bloch v. Powell, 348 F.3d 1060 (11/21/2003). 3-0 Panel. Roberts' opinion. Affirmed lower court’s dismissal of claim by State Department employee. Employer
- International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 470, ALF-CIO v. National Labor Relations Board, 350 F.3d 105 (12/02/2003). 3-0 panel. Affirmed NLRB decision in favor of employer. Employer
- Stewart v. Evans, 351 F.3d 1239 (12/19/2003). 3-0 panel. Roberts' opinion. Affirmed dismissal of employee’s claim of wrongful search by employer. Employer
- American Federation of Government Employees v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 352 F.3d 433 (12/23/2003). 3-0 panel. Upheld Federal Labor Relations Authority dismissal of union claim. Employer
- LeMoyne-Owen College v. National Labor Relations Board, 357 F.3d 55 (02/10/2004). 3-0 panel. Judge Roberts' opinion. Granted employer's petition for review of NLRB's decision and remanded to the Board for further proceedings. Employer
- Graham v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 931 (02/24/2004). 2004 3-0 panel. Roberts' opinion. Affirmed trial court’s dismissal of FBI agent’s claim. Employer
- Association of Civilian Technicians v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 360 F.3d 195 (03/12/2004). 3-0 panel. Reversed finding of FLRA, granting union’s petition to review. Employee
- S.A. Storer and Sons Co. v. Secretary of Labor, 360 F.3d 1363 (03/19/2004). 3-0 panel. Agreeing, in part, that employer had not violated OSHA standards, sent back for further proceedings. Mixed
- Dunkin' Donuts Mid-Atlantic Distribution Center, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 363 F.3d 437 (April 02, 2004). 3-0 panel. Affirmed NLRB’s finding against employer. Employee
- Evergreen America Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 362 F.3d 827 (04/02/2004) 3-0 panel. Affirming NLRB’s finding that employer had refused to bargain. Employee
- National Association of Government Employees, Local R5-136 v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 363 F.3d 468 (04/06/2004). 3-0 panel. FLRA had dismissed two complaints brought by Union. Court reversed one, and upheld one. Employee
- Duchek v. National Transportation Safety Board, 364 F.3d 311 (04/20/2004). 3-0 Panel. Roberts' opinion. Held FAA action arbitrary regarding drug test. Employee
- American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO, v. National Labor Relations Board, 370 F.3d 25 (06/04/2004). 3-0 panel. Affirmed NLRB decision in favor of employer. Employer
- In re England, No. 03-5329 (D.C.Cir. 07/27/2004) 3-0 panel. Roberts' opinion. Reversed trial court and upheld rule that Chapliancy Board decisions not open to review. Challenge was filed by Full Gospel Chaplaincy Group. Mixed
- United States ex rel Totten v. Bombardier Corporation, 380 F.3d 488 (08/27/2004) 2-1 panel. Roberts' majority opinion. Affirmed dismissal of whistleblower complaint. Employer
- Carter v. George Washington University, No. 01-7203 (D.C.Cir. 10/29/2004) No. 01-7203 October 29, 2004 3-0 panel. Upheld trial court’s grant of summary judgment on Title VII claim. Employer
- United States, ex rel Williams v. Martin-Baker Aircraft Co., Ltd. (11/26/2004). 3-0 panel. Reversed and reinstated whistle-blower claim. Employee
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 392 F.3d 498 (12/17/2004) Reversed FLRA and sustained union’s complaint. Employee
- Hutchinson v. Central Intelligence Agency, 393 F.3d 226 (01/04/2005). 3-0 panel. Affirms trial court’s summary judgment in favor of employer. Employer
- American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees Capital Area Council 26 v. Federal Labor Relations Authority, 395 F.3d 443 (01/14/2005). 3-0 panel. Held the FLRA properly dismissed complaint of Union. Employer
- National Treasury Employees Union v. Federal Labor Realtions Authority, 404 F.3d 454 (04/15/2005). 3-0 panel. Roberts' concurring. Upheld Union’s position over whether bargaining was required. Employee
- WalMart Stores, Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, 406 F.3d 731 (05/10/2005). 3-0 panel. Denies WalMart’s challenge of OSHA violation. Employee
- Wagener v. SBC Pension Benefit Plan - Non Bargained Program, 407 F.3d 395 (05/17/2005). 3-0 panel. Reversed trial court’s dismissal of claim. Found employee had stated a claim for ERISA discrimination. Employee
- ITT Industries, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, (06/28/2005). 3- 0 Panel. Affirmed NLRB’s finding against employer. Employee
- Booker v. Robert Halfinternational, Inc. (07/01/2005). 3-0 panel. Roberts' opinion. Severed out provision of arbitration agreement that was unenforceable, enforced the arbitration agreement. Employer
- Porter v. Natsios, (07/01/2005). 3-0 panel. Roberts' opinion. Affirmed trial court’s dismissal of Title VII claim of employee. Employer
Donald Caster, who is the author of a superb blog with a different point of view, All Deliberate Speed, has contributed to this look at Judge Roberts' record with a more detailed analysis of some of the opinions on the court, as well as a look at some of the cases he handled as an advocate. See Judge Roberts' Record on Employment Law.
More I am sure will come in the future, but for those interested in going to the source materials so to speak, here's a start.
Update: Although not highlighted all case names should be links to the actual decision.