Given the expectations that preceded the Board's decisions, and the reactions that followed, it is somewhat surprising how little attention has been given to the decisions the NLRB has issued since Electromation and E.I. du Pont. While in general these recent decisions are consistent with the holdings in Electromation and E.I. du Pont, they provide us with the opportunity to analyze the manner in which the Board is currently dealing with the legality of workplace cooperative efforts. This article explores that issue. Part II of the article provides a brief overview of the workplace cooperative efforts problem. Part III reviews the Board's decisions in Electromation and E.I. du Pont, and describes the various interpretations that were initially attributed to these two decisions. In Part IV, I analyze the cases decided since these two seminal decisions. The argument is advanced that while the Board generally continues to follow the contours of the test developed in Electromation and E.I. du Pont, the most recent decisions indicate a degree of uneasiness with the current approach to the workplace cooperative efforts problem. To the surprise of many, this, to some degree, was the extent of the law before the Board's anti-climatic intervention. In that sense, not much has changed. Part V concludes the article.
Rafael Gely, Where Are We Now?: Life After Electromation, 15 Hofstra Lab. & Emp. L.J. 45 (1997)