ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 25, 2019

368 NLRB No. 25 (N.L.R.B. 2019)

368 NLRB No. 25
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Alorica, Inc., and its subsidiary/affiliate Expert Glob-
al Solutions, Inc.1 and OPEIU Local 153, Office
& Professional Employees International Union,
AFL–CIO
Alorica, Inc., and its subsidiary/affiliate Expert Glob-
al Solutions, Inc. and Seth Goldstein and Office
& Professional Employees International Union,
Local 53. Cases 18–CA–190846, 25–CA–185622,
and 25–CA–185626
July 25, 2019
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN RING AND MEMBERS KAPLAN
AND EMANUEL
On October 18, 2017, Administrative Law Judge
Melissa M. Olivero issued the attached decision. The
Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, the
General Counsel filed an answering brief, and the Re-
spondent filed a reply. The General Counsel filed limited
cross-exceptions and a supporting brief, and the Re-
spondent filed an answering brief.2 On October 29, 2018,
the Board issued a Notice to Show Cause why the com-
plaint allegations involving the maintenance of allegedly
unlawful work rules or policies should not be severed
and remanded to the administrative law judge. The Gen-
eral Counsel and the Respondent filed responses.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the decision and the record
in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to
affirm the judge’s rulings, findings,3 and conclusions4

1 We amend the caption to correct the name of the Respondent, Ex-
pert Global Solutions, Inc.
2 The Respondent also submitted a letter pursuant to Sec. 102.6 of
the Board’s Rules and Regulations, and the General Counsel filed a
response.
3 For the reasons given in the judge’s decision, we adopt her finding
that the Respondent violated the Act by threatening to discharge Jen-
nifer Fultz and Clarise Washington.
In finding that the Respondent violated Sec. 8(a)(1) by discharging
Fultz and Washington for refusing to sign its Agreement to Arbitrate,
we find it unnecessary to rely on Continental Group, Inc., 357 NLRB
409 (2011), or Double Eagle Hotel & Casino, 341 NLRB 112 (2004),
enfd. 414 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2005). Instead, we rely on Deep Dis-
tributors of Greater NY d/b/a The Imperial Sales, Inc., 365 NLRB No.
95, slip op. at 3 (2017) (violation to discharge employees for failure to
sign unlawful rule), enfd. mem. 740 Fed.Appx. 216 (2d Cir. 2018).
4 We have amended the judge’s conclusions of law to omit her in-
advertent finding of an enforcement violation, which was neither al-
leged in the complaint nor litigated by the parties. We have amended
the remedy to provide that the Respondent shall compensate Fultz and
only to the extent consistent with this Decision and Or-
der.
Background
Since at least July 2016, the Respondent has main-
tained an Agreement to Arbitrate (Agreement), which
employees are required to sign as a condition of em-
ployment. The relevant portion of the Agreement reads
as follows:
All disputes, claims, or controversies arising out of or
relating to your employment by the Company, the ter-
mination of your employment by the Company, and/or
this Offer Letter, and any claims or disputes as to the
scope and enforceability of this arbitration agreement,
shall be resolved exclusively by final and binding arbi-
tration.
. . . .
You and the Company agree that any dispute or con-
troversy arising out of or in any way related to your
employment, or the termination of your employment,
which cannot be resolved by use of the Company’s in-
ternal grievance procedures or by good faith negotia-
tion between the parties, will be resolved by final and
binding arbitration as provided herein. You and the
Company voluntarily and irrevocably waive any and all
rights to have any such dispute decided in court or by a
jury.
Discussion
Applying the Board’s decision in U-Haul Co. of Cali-
fornia, 347 NLRB 375, 377–378 (2006), enfd. 255
Fed.Appx. 527 (D.C. Cir. 2007), which relied on the
“reasonably construe” prong of Lutheran Heritage Vil-
lage-Livonia, 343 NLRB 646 (2004), the judge found
that employees would reasonably read the Agreement to
prohibit the filing of unfair labor practice charges with
the Board. The judge thus concluded that the Respond-
ent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act by maintaining the Agreement.
Recently, the Board issued a decision in The Boeing
Co., 365 NLRB No. 154 (2017), overruling the “reason-
ably construe” prong of Lutheran Heritage. Boeing set
forth an analysis for evaluating facially neutral rules to
strike the proper balance between the business justifica-

Washington for their search-for-work and interim employment expens-
es. We shall modify the judge’s recommended Order to be consistent
with our findings and to conform to the Board’s standard remedial
language. We shall further modify the judge’s recommended Order in
accordance with our decision in Excel Container, Inc., 325 NLRB 17
(1997). We shall substitute a new notice to conform to the Order as
modified.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
tions for maintaining a challenged rule and the invasion
of employee rights in light of the Act and its policies,
viewing the rule or policy from the employees’ perspec-
tive. Id. Subsequently, the Board issued a decision in
Prime Healthcare Paradise Valley, LLC, which found
that, under Boeing, arbitration agreements violate the Act
when, “taken as a whole, [they] make arbitration the ex-
clusive forum for the resolution of all claims, including
federal statutory claims under the National Labor Rela-
tions Act.” 368 NLRB No. 10, slip op. at 6 (2019). Fur-
ther, the Board found that, “as a matter of law, there is
not and cannot be any legitimate justification for provi-
sions, in an arbitration agreement or otherwise, that re-
strict employees’ access to the Board or its processes.”
Id.
The Agreement here requires that “all disputes . . .
shall be resolved exclusively by final and binding arbitra-
tion.” As in Prime Healthcare, we find that such lan-
guage makes arbitration the exclusive forum for resolving
all disputes, including those brought under the Act, and
is therefore unlawful. In so finding, we find unpersua-
sive the Respondent’s argument that the Agreement’s
interference with Section 7 rights is minimal or out-
weighed by the efficient resolution of workplace dis-
putes. Accordingly, we find that the Agreement is un-
lawful under Category 3 of Boeing. Id., slip op. at 6–7.5
AMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Substitute the following for Conclusion of Law 2.
“2. Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by
maintaining its Agreement to Arbitrate.”
AMENDED REMEDY
In addition to the remedies provided in the judge’s Or-
der as amended, we shall also order the Respondent to
compensate Fultz and Washington for reasonable search-
for-work and interim employment expenses regardless of
whether those expenses exceed interim earnings, in ac-
cordance with our decision in King Soopers, Inc., 364
NLRB No. 93 (2016), enfd. in relevant part 859 F.3d 23
(D.C. Cir. 2017). Search-for-work and interim employ-
ment expenses shall be calculated separately from taxa-
ble net backpay, with interest at the rate prescribed
in New Horizons, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), compounded

5 Prime Healthcare also considered and rejected the contention that
an arbitration agreement is rendered lawful by language that limits its
scope to claims for which a court would be authorized to grant relief.
Id., slip op. at 6 & fn. 12. Accordingly, we reject the Respondent’s
argument that its Agreement is lawful because it does not mention
proceedings before the Board but applies only to claims “decided in
court or by a jury.”
daily as prescribed in Kentucky River Medical Center,
356 NLRB 6 (2010).6
ORDER
The Respondent, Alorica Inc. and its subsidi-
ary/affiliate Expert Global Solutions, Inc., with facilities
in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Rockford, Illinois, its offic-
ers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Maintaining an Agreement to Arbitrate that em-
ployees reasonably would believe bars or restricts the
right to file charges with the National Labor Relations
Board.
(b) Threatening to discharge employees for failing or
refusing to sign an Agreement to Arbitrate that they rea-
sonably would believe bars or restricts the right to file
charges with the National Labor Relations Board.
(c) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against
employees for failing or refusing to sign an Agreement to
Arbitrate that they reasonably would believe bars or re-
stricts the right to file charges with the National Labor
Relations Board.
(d) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Rescind the Agreement to Arbitrate in all its
forms, or revise it in all its forms to make clear to em-
ployees that the Agreement to Arbitrate does not bar or
restrict employees’ right to file charges with the National
Labor Relations Board.
(b) Notify all current and former employees who were
required to sign or otherwise became bound to the
Agreement to Arbitrate in any form that the Agreement
to Arbitrate has been rescinded or revised, and if revised,
provide them a copy of the revised agreement.
(c) Within 14 days from the date of this Order, offer
Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington full reinstatement
to their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist, to
substantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to
their seniority or any other rights or privileges previously
enjoyed.
(d) Make Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington
whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered
as a result of the discrimination against them plus rea-

6 The General Counsel seeks a make-whole remedy that includes
consequential damages incurred as a result of the Respondent’s unfair
labor practice. The relief sought would require a change in Board law.
Having duly considered the matter, we are not prepared at this time to
deviate from our current remedial practice. Accordingly, we decline to
order this relief at this time. Laborers’ International Union of North
America, Local Union No. 91 (Council of Utility Contractors), 365
NLRB No. 28, slip op. at 1 fn. 2 (2017).
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 3
sonable search-for-work and interim employment ex-
penses, in the manner set forth in the remedy section of
the judge’s decision as amended in this decision.
(e) Compensate Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washing-
ton for the adverse tax consequences, if any, of receiving
a lump-sum backpay award, and file with the Regional
Director for Region 18, within 21 days of the date the
amount of backpay is fixed, either by agreement or
Board order, a report allocating the backpay award to the
appropriate calendar years for each employee.
(f) Within 14 days from the date of this Order, remove
from its files any reference to the unlawful discharges,
and within 3 days thereafter, notify Jennifer Fultz and
Clarise Washington in writing that this has been done
and that the discharges will not be used against them in
any way.
(g) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such
additional time as the Regional Director may allow for
good cause shown, provide at a reasonable place desig-
nated by the Board or its agents, all payroll records, so-
cial security payment records, timecards, personnel rec-
ords and reports, and all other records, including an elec-
tronic copy of such records if stored in electronic form,
necessary to analyze the amount of backpay due under
the terms of this Order.
(h) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facilities in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and Rockford, Illi-
nois, copies of the attached notice marked “Appendix
A,” and at all other facilities where the unlawful arbitra-
tion agreement is or has been in effect, copies of the at-
tached notice marked “Appendix B.”7 Copies of the no-
tice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Re-
gion 18, after being signed by the Respondent’s author-
ized representative, shall be posted by the Respondent
and maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous
places, including all places where notices to employees
are customarily posted. In addition to physical posting of
paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically,
such as by email, posting on an intranet or an internet
site, and/or other electronic means, if the Respondent
customarily communicates with its employees by such
means. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respond-
ent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material. If the Respondent has
gone out of business or closed the facility involved in
these proceedings, the Respondent shall duplicate and
mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice to all cur-

7 If this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States court of
appeals, the words in the notice reading “Posted by Order of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
rent employees and former employees employed by the
Respondent at any time since July 11, 2016.
(i) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file
with the Regional Director for Region 18 a sworn certifi-
cation of a responsible official on a form provided by the
Region attesting to the steps that the Respondent has
taken to comply.
Dated, Washington, D.C. July 25, 2019
______________________________________
John F. Ring, Chairman
______________________________________
Marvin E. Kaplan, Member
______________________________________
William J. Emanuel, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Board has found that we vio-
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on
your behalf
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities.
WE WILL NOT maintain an Agreement to Arbitrate that
our employees reasonably would believe bars or restricts
their right to file charges with the National Labor Rela-
tions Board.
WE WILL NOT threaten to discharge you for failing or
refusing to sign an Agreement to Arbitrate that you rea-
sonably would believe bars or restricts the right to file
charges with the National Labor Relations Board.
WE WILL NOT discharge or otherwise discriminate
against you for failing or refusing to sign an Agreement
to Arbitrate that you reasonably would believe bars or
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD4
restricts the right to file charges with the National Labor
Relations Board.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
listed above.
WE WILL rescind the Agreement to Arbitrate in all its
forms or revise it in all its forms to make clear that the
Agreement to Arbitrate does not restrict your right to file
charges with the National Labor Relations Board.
WE WILL notify all current and former employees who
were required to sign or otherwise became bound to the
Agreement to Arbitrate in any form that the Agreement
to Arbitrate has been rescinded or revised and, if revised,
WE WILL provide them a copy of the revised agreement.
WE WILL, within 14 days from the date of the Board’s
Order, offer Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington full
reinstatement to their former jobs or, if those jobs no
longer exist, to substantially equivalent positions, with-
out prejudice to their seniority or any other rights or priv-
ileges previously enjoyed.
WE WILL make Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington
whole for any loss of earnings and other benefits result-
ing from their discharge, less any net interim earnings,
plus interest, and WE WILL also make them whole for
reasonable search-for-work and interim employment
expenses, plus interest.
WE WILL compensate Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Wash-
ington for the adverse tax consequences, if any, of re-
ceiving lump-sum backpay awards, and WE WILL file
with the Regional Director for Region 18, within 21 days
of the date the amount of backpay is fixed, either by
agreement or Board order, a report allocating the back-
pay awards to the appropriate calendar year(s) for each
employee.
WE WILL, within 14 days from the date of the Board’s
Order, remove from our files any reference to the unlaw-
ful discharges of Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington,
and WE WILL, within 3 days thereafter, notify them in
writing that this has been done and that the discharges
will not be used against them in any way.
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE
EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
The Board’s decision can be found at
https://www.nlrb.gov/case/18-CA-190846 or by using the
QR code below. Alternatively, you can obtain a copy of the
decision from the Executive Secretary, National Labor Re-
lations Board, 1015 Half Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.
20570, or by calling (202) 273–1940.
APPENDIX B
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Board has found that we vio-
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on
your behalf
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities.
WE WILL NOT maintain an Agreement to Arbitrate that
our employees reasonably would believe bars or restricts
their right to file charges with the National Labor Rela-
tions Board.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
listed above.
WE WILL rescind the Agreement to Arbitrate in all its
forms or revise it in all its forms to make clear that the
Agreement to Arbitrate does not restrict your right to file
charges with the National Labor Relations Board.
WE WILL notify all current and former employees who
were required to sign or otherwise became bound to the
Agreement to Arbitrate in any form that the Agreement
to Arbitrate has been rescinded or revised and, if revised,
WE WILL provide them a copy of the revised agreement.
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE
EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
The Board’s decision can be found at
https://www.nlrb.gov/case/18-CA-190846 or by using the
QR code below. Alternatively, you can obtain a copy of the
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 5
decision from the Executive Secretary, National Labor Re-
lations Board, 1015 Half Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.
20570, or by calling (202) 273–1940.
Joseph Bornong, Esq., for the General Counsel.
Harry J. Secaras, Esq. (Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak &
Stewart, P.C.), of Chicago, Illinois, for the Respondent.
DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
MELISSA M. OLIVERO, Administrative Law Judge. This case
was tried in Rockford, Illinois, on July 13, 2017. Seth Goldstein
and the Office Professional Employees Local 153 filed the
charges pertaining to Jennifer Fultz on October 5, 2016 (Cases
25–CA–185622 and 25–CA–185626). They filed the charge
pertaining to Clarise Washington on January 5, 2017 (Case 18–
CA–190846). The General Counsel issued a consolidated
complaint in Cases 25–CA–185622 and 25–CA–185626 on
December 29, 2016, a complaint in Case 18–CA–190846 on
April 19, 2017, and an order consolidating these cases on June
14, 2017. (GC Exh. 1(g), (r), (v).)
Respondent insisted that all employees sign an agreement to
arbitrate in order to continuing to work for Alorica after it ac-
quired Expert Global Solutions (EGS). On September 12,
2016, it terminated the employment of Fultz and Washington
for their refusal to do so. Prior to these discharges, Respondent
threatened both Fultz and Washington with termination if they
refused to sign the arbitration agreement.
On the entire record, including my observation of the de-
meanor of the witnesses, and after considering the briefs filed
by the General Counsel and Respondent, I make the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
Respondent, a corporation, operates call centers from various
locations, including Rockford, Illinois, and a training facility in
Cedar Rapids, Iowa. In the 12 months prior to June 14, 2017,
Respondent performed services valued in excess of $50,000
outside of Iowa. Respondent admits, and I find, that it is an
employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section
2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act. (GC Exh. 1(k), (u).) Respondent
further admits, and I find, that Joseph Meza, Patricia (Pat)
Green, Katie Aldridge, and Esmeralda (Essie) Samardzic are
supervisors of Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11)
of the Act and/or agents of Respondent within the meaning of
Section 2(13) of the Act. (GC Exh. 1(k), (u).)
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
In June 2016 Respondent Alorica acquired Expert Global
Solutions (EGS). (Tr. 46.) Alorica retained all the employees
of EGS, provided they signed the following agreement:
. . . In the interest of gaining the benefits of a speedy and im-
partial dispute-resolution procedure for any disputes which
may arise between us concerning your employment by the
Company, You and the Company desire to submit any such
disputes to binding arbitration as described below. . .
All disputes, claims, or controversies arising out of or relating
to your employment by the Company, the termination of your
employment by the Company, and/or this Offer Letter, and
any
claims or disputes as to the scope and enforceability of this
arbitration agreement, shall be resolved exclusively by final
and binding arbitration.
Arbitration pursuant to this Agreement shall be held within
the
Federal Judicial District in which you are or were last em-
ployed bythe Company and shall be conducted pursuant to the
JAMS Employment Arbitration Rules . . . The Company
agrees to bear all but the first $350 of the arbitration filing fee.
You and the Company expressly intend and agree that class
action, collective action, and representative action procedures
shall not be asserted, nor shall they apply, in any arbitration
pursuant to this Agreement; that neither You nor the Compa-
ny shall assert a class, collective, or representative claim
against the other, in arbitration or otherwise; and that each of
You and the Company shall submit only its own, individual
claims to arbitration and will not seek torepresent the interests
of any other person:
You and the Company agree that any dispute or controversy
arising out of or in any way related to your employment, or
the termination of your employment, which cannot be re-
solved by use of the Company's internal grievance procedures
or by good faith negotiation between the parties, will be re-
solved by final and binding arbitration as provided herein.
You and the Company voluntarily and irrevocably waive any
and all rights to have anysuch dispute decided in court or by a
jury.
(GC Exh. 2.) In July 2016, Respondent announced to its em-
ployees that were previously employed by EGS, that they must
sign the Agreement to Arbitrate (arbitration agreement) in order
to retain their employment with Respondent. (Tr. 49–50.)
Thus, signing this agreement was required as a condition of
continued employment. (GC Exh. 4; Tr. 64.)
Jennifer Fultz, a call center employee in Rockford, Illinois,
who had worked for EGS for 4-1/2 years, refused to sign the
arbitration agreement. (Tr. 14.) Fultz was terminated and es-
corted from the premises by the police after refusing to sign the
agreement. (Tr. 16–17.) Clarise Washington, a call center
employee/trainer assigned to Respondent’s facility in Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, who worked for EGS for 3 years, also refused to
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD6
sign the agreement and was terminated the same day.1 (Tr. 33–
34.)
On September 12, 2016, Fultz reported to work in Rockford,
Illinois, as usual and began taking calls. (Tr. 12.) Around 9
a.m., Fultz was summoned to the office of Katie Aldridge in
Respondent’s human resources department.2 (Tr. 12–13.) Al-
dridge presented Fultz with a copy of the arbitration agreement
and told her to sign it. (Tr. 13.) Fultz told Aldridge that she
did not agree with the arbitration agreement. (Tr. 13.) Fultz
also asked to take the agreement to a lawyer and said she would
sign it if the lawyer approved. (Tr. 14.) Aldridge responded
that Fultz had 30 minutes in which to sign the agreement, and,
if she did not, Fultz would be considered “voluntarily resign-
ing.” (Tr. 14.)
A short time later, Futz returned to Aldridge’s office. (Tr.
14.) She told Aldridge that she would sign the arbitration
agreement under protest. (Tr. 14.) Fultz signed the agreement
and Aldridge made a copy for her. (Tr. 14.) Fultz then
changed her mind and asked for the document back. (Tr. 15.)
A few minutes later, with another employee present as a wit-
ness by Futlz’ request, Fultz advised Aldridge that she would
not sign the arbitration agreement, but that she was not quitting
her job either. (Tr. 15.) Aldridge told Fultz that if she did not
sign the agreement, they could “gather [her] stuff” and “[do] a
walk out.” (Tr. 15.) Fultz told Aldridge to call the cops be-
cause she was not quitting her job. (Tr. 15.) Aldridge then
called Pat [Green] at Respondent’s corporate headquarters and
explained that Fultz would not sign the agreement and was
refusing to leave. (Tr. 15–16.) Green told Aldridge that Fultz
was trespassing by refusing to leave and advised Aldridge to
summon the police. (Tr. 16.) The police were called and es-
corted Fultz from the premises. (Tr. 16–17.)
On September 12, 2016, Clarise Washington began her
workday as usual. (Tr. 32.) Between 9 and 10 a.m., she was
she was called into a telephone conference with Joe Meza. (Tr.
33.) Meza asked Washington if she was going to sign the arbi-
tration agreement. (Tr. 33.) She said no. (Id.) Meza then said,
well, we have given you enough time and we are going to ter-
minate you at the end of the day as a voluntary resignation.
(Id.) Washington advised Meza that she had already emailed
Samardzic that she was not quitting and would sign the agree-
ment. (Tr. 33–34.) Meza then stated that Respondent was
terminating Washington at the end of the day.3 (Tr. 34.)

1 Although Respondent attempted to characterize these terminations
as “voluntary separations,” I find that they were, in fact, terminations of
employment. (Tr. 57.) Fultz and Washington both testified that did not
quit and were discharged after refusing to sign the arbitration agree-
ment. (Tr. 16, 33–34.) There is no evidence that either employee would
have been fired, but for their refusals to sign the arbitration agreement.
2 Aldridge did not testify at the hearing.
3 Meza testified that he, “Never threatened to terminate. I basically
shared with her that by not agreeing to Alorica's binding Arbitration
Agreement, that is a personal choice and that it would be considered as
a voluntary resignation and that would be processed accordingly.” (Tr.
57.) Despite Meza’s characterization that his statement was not a
threat, I find that it was. Meza clearly told Washington that her em-
ployment with Respondent would end if she chose not to sign the arbi-
tration agreement.
A few minutes later, Washington was called into another tel-
ephone conference, this time with Samardzic. (Tr. 34.) During
this phone call, Washington was told to immediately log off of
the system because she was terminated. (Tr. 34.) Washington
did so immediately. (Id.)
Analysis
Respondent’s Agreement to Arbitrate violates the Act
The issue before me regarding Respondent’s arbitration
agreement is limited to whether it violates the Act because it
would reasonably be read to preclude filing charges with the
Board. The Regional Director for Region 18 approved a condi-
tional settlement prior to the hearing in which the parties agreed
to act in accordance with the Supreme Court’s disposition of
NLRB v. Murphy Oil, Docket No. 16-307 with regard to class
actions such as those filed under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
(R. Br. fn. 2.) This decision does not address the broader Mur-
phy Oil issue.
Any employer policy, including one contained in a mandato-
ry arbitration agreement, which would reasonably be read to
prohibit the filing of unfair labor practice charges with the
Board violates the Act even if it does not explicitly restrict
access to the Board. 2 Sisters Food Group, 357 NLRB 1816
(2011). Respondent’s arbitration agreement specifically applies
to “any disputes which may arise between us concerning your
employment by the Company,” without any limiting language.
Non-lawyer employees would be very unlikely to read this
provision as excluding the filing of unfair labor practice charg-
es from the purview of the agreement. Other language in the
agreement, waiving the right to have any such dispute decided
in court or by a jury, does not detract from a layman’s likely
understanding that the agreement applies to all employment
disputes, including those in which the employee believes that
the employer committed an unfair labor practice, U-Haul Co. of
California, 347 NLRB 375, 377–378 (2006), enfd. 255
Fed.Appx. 527 (D.C. Cir. 2007).
Respondent unlawfully threatened Jennifer Fultz and
Clarise Washington
The Board has long held that an employer violates Section
8(a)(1) of the Act when it engages in conduct that might rea-
sonably tend to interfere with the free exercise of employee
rights under Section 7. Greenbriar Rail Services, 364 NLRB
No. 30, slip op. at 35 (2016), citing American Freightways Co.,
124 NLRB 146 (1959). The Board has found that threatening
to terminate, and subsequently actually terminating, an employ-
ee for refusing to sign an arbitration agreement violates the Act.
SF Markets, LLC, 363 NLRB No. 146, slip op. at 2 (2016),
affd. 691 Fed.Appx. 815 (5th Cir. 2016). By maintaining the
arbitration agreement, which I have found unlawful, as a condi-
tion of employment, threatening to discharge and/or discharg-
ing an employee for refusing to agree to the unlawful arbitra-
tion agreement also violates Section 8(a)(1). Id., citing Denson
Electric Co., 133 NLRB 122, 129, 131 (1961), and Keiser Uni-
versity, 363 NLRB No. 73, slip op. at 1, 7 (2015) (affirming
judge’s finding that discharging employee for refusing to sign
unlawful arbitration agreement was unlawful).
Both Fultz and Washington testified that they were threat-
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 7
ened with discharge if they refused to sign the arbitration
agreement. This evidence was not refuted or contradicted by
any of Respondent’s witnesses. I have already found that by
maintaining the arbitration agreement, Respondent violated the
Act. Therefore, I find that the statements made by Meza and
Aldridge, advising Fultz and Washington that they would be
discharged if they refused to sign the arbitration agreement,
violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
Respondent violated the Act in terminating Jennifer Fultz and
Clarise Washington
Respondent argues that even if its arbitration agreement vio-
lates the Act, neither Fultz nor Washington is entitled to any
remedy, such as reinstatement and backpay. Respondent con-
tends this is so because neither engaged in any protected con-
certed activity and neither specifically objected to signing the
arbitration agreement on the grounds that it interfered with their
ability to file an unfair labor practice charge.
Regardless of whether either Fultz or Washington engaged in
protected activity, Respondent violated the Act in terminating
them. Discipline imposed pursuant to an unlawfully overbroad
rule is generally unlawful. Continental Group, Inc., 357 NLRB
409 (2011); Double Eagle Hotel & Casino, 341 NLRB 112,
112 fn. 3 (2004), enfd. 414 F. 3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2005); Butler
Medical Transport, LLC, 365 NLRB No. 112 (2017). See also
SF Markets, LLC, supra.
In Continental Group, Inc., supra, the Board held that this
principle does not apply in situations in which the conduct for
which an employee is disciplined is wholly distinct from activi-
ty that fall within the ambit of Section 7 (e.g., sleeping on the
employer’s premises when off duty). The exception does not
apply in this case, wherein Respondent’s rule touches on con-
cerns animating Section 7 conduct (e.g. filing charges with the
Board). Thus, Respondent’s discharge of Fultz and Washing-
ton violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Respondent has been an employer engaged in commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act.
2. Respondent has and is violating Section 8(a)(1) of the Act
in maintaining and enforcing its Agreement to Arbitrate.
3. Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by threat-
ening Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington with discharge if
they refused to sign its Agreement to Arbitrate.
4. Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by dis-
charging Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington.
5. By engaging in the unlawful conduct set forth in para-
graphs 2, 3, and 4, above, Respondent has engaged in unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(a)(1), and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in certain un-
fair labor practices, I shall order it to cease and desist therefrom
and to take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the
policies of the Act.
The Respondent, having discriminatorily discharged Jennifer
Fultz and Clarise Washington, must offer them reinstatement
and make them whole for any loss of earnings and other bene-
fits. Backpay shall be computed in accordance with F. W.
Woolworth Co., 90 NLRB 289 (1950), with interest at the rate
prescribed in New Horizons, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), com-
pounded daily as prescribed in Kentucky River Medical Center,
356 NLRB 6 (2010). Respondent shall further compensate the
affected employees for any adverse tax consequences of receiv-
ing a lump-sum backpay award. Don Chavas, LLC d/b/a Tor-
tillas Don Chavas, 361 NLRB 101 (2014).
The Respondent, having discriminatorily discharged Jennifer
Fultz and Clarise Washington, must offer them reinstatement
and make them whole for any loss of earnings and other bene-
fits. Backpay shall be computed in accordance with F. W.
Woolworth Co., 90 NLRB 289 (1950), with interest at the rate
prescribed in New Horizons, 283 NLRB 1173 (1987), com-
pounded daily as prescribed in Kentucky River Medical Center,
356 NLRB 6 (2010). Respondent shall further compensate the
affected employees for any adverse tax consequences of receiv-
ing a lump-sum backpay award. Don Chavas, LLC d/b/a Tor-
tillas Don Chavas, supra.
Respondent shall also expunge from its files any reference to
Fultz’ and Washington’s unlawful discharges and to notify
them in writing that this has been done and that the loss of em-
ployment will not be used against them in any way.
In addition, Respondent shall, within 21 days of the date the
amount of backpay is fixed, either by agreement or Board or-
der, file a report allocating backpay with the Regional Director
for Region 18. Respondent will be required to allocate backpay
to the appropriate calendar years only. The Regional Director
will then assume responsibility for transmission of the report to
the Social Security Administration at the appropriate time and
in the appropriate manner. AdvoServ of New Jersey, Inc., 363
NLRB No. 143 (2016).
I further recommend that Respondent post a notice in the
usual manner, including electronically to the extent mandated
in J. Picini Flooring, 356 NLRB 11, 15–16 (2010), enfd. 656
F.3d 860 (9th Cir. 2011).
On these findings of fact and conclusions of law and on the
entire record, I issue the following recommended4
ORDER
The Respondent, Alorica Inc. and its subsidiary/affiliate Ex-
pert Global Solutions, its officers, agents, successors, and as-
signs, shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against any em-
ployee for violating an unlawful rule that touches upon Section
7 conduct.
(b) Threatening employees with discharge for refusing to
sign an unlawful arbitration agreement.
(c) Maintaining and enforcing rules, policies, agreements,
and/or provisions that would reasonably be read to prohibit
filing unfair labor practice charges.
(d) In any like or related manner interfering with, restrain-

4 If no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec. 102.46 of the
Board’s Rules and Regulations, the findings, conclusions, and recom-
mended Order shall, as provided in Sec. 102.48 of the Rules, be adopt-
ed by the Board and all objections to them shall be deemed waived for
all purposes.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD8
ing, or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaran-
teed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to effec-
tuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Within 14 days from the date of the Board’s Order, offer
Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington full reinstatement to
their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist, to substantial-
ly equivalent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or
any other rights or privileges previously enjoyed.
(b) Make Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington whole for
any loss of earnings and other benefits suffered as a result of
the discrimination against them in the manner set forth in the
remedy section of the decision.
(c) Compensate Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington for
the adverse tax consequences, if any, of receiving a lump-sum
backpay award, and file with the Regional Director for Region
18, within 21 days of the date the amount of backpay is fixed,
either by agreement or Board order, a report allocating the
backpay awarded to the appropriate calendar years.
(d) Within 21 days of the date that the amount of backpay is
fixed, either by agreement or Board order, file a report allocat-
ing backpay with the Regional Director for Region 18. Re-
spondent will be required to allocate backpay to the appropriate
calendar years only. The Regional Director will then assume
responsibility for transmission of the report to the Social Secu-
rity Administration at the appropriate time and in the appropri-
ate manner.
(e) Compensate Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington for
any adverse tax consequences of receiving a lump-sum backpay
award.
(f) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such addi-
tional time as the Regional Director may allow for good cause
shown, provide at a reasonable place designated by the Board
or its agents, all payroll records, social security payment rec-
ords, timecards, personnel records and reports, and all other
records, including an electronic copy of such records if stored
in electronic form, necessary to analyze the amount of backpay
due under the terms of this Order.
(g) Within 14 days from the date of the Board’s Order, re-
move from its files any reference to the unlawful discharges,
and within 3 days thereafter notify Jennifer Fultz and Clarise
Washington in writing that this has been done and that the dis-
charges will not be used against them anyway.
(h) Rescind or revise any rules, policies, agreements and/or
provisions that would reasonably be read to prohibit filing un-
fair labor practice charges and effectively communicate to all
its employees that these rules, etc. have been rescinded or re-
vised.
(i) Preserve and, within 14 days of a request, or such addi-
tional time as the Regional Director may allow for good cause
shown, provide at a reasonable place designated by the Board
or its agents, all payroll records, social security payment rec-
ords, timecards, personnel records and reports, and all other
records, including an electronic copy of such records if stored
in electronic form, necessary to analyze the amount of backpay
due under the terms of this Order.
(j) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at all its
facilities copies of the attached notice marked “Appendix.”5
Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the Regional Direc-
tor for Region 18, after being signed by the Respondent’s au-
thorized representative, shall be posted by the Respondent and
maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places in-
cluding all places where notices to employees are customarily
posted. In addition to physical posting of paper notices, the
notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by email,
posting on an intranet or an internet site, and/or other electronic
means, if the Respondent customarily communicates with its
employees by such means. Reasonable steps shall be taken by
the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered, de-
faced, or covered by any other material. In the event that, dur-
ing the pendency of these proceedings, the Respondent has
gone out of business or closed the facility involved in these
proceedings, the Respondent shall duplicate and mail, at its
own expense, a copy of the notice to all current employees and
former employees employed by the Respondent at any time
since September 12, 2016.
(k) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file with the
Regional Director a sworn certification of a responsible official
on a form provided by the Region attesting to the steps that the
Respondent has taken to comply.
Dated, Washington, D.C. October 18, 2017
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Board has found that we violated
Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey this no-
tice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on your be-
half
Act together with other employees for your benefit and
protection.
Choose not to engage in any of these protected activi-
ties.
WE WILL NOT discharge or otherwise discriminate against
any employee for violating an unlawful rule that touches upon
Section 7 conduct.
WE WILL NOT threaten you with discharge for refusing to sign
our Agreement to Arbitrate.
WE WILL NOT maintain rules, policies, agreements, and/or
provisions that would be reasonably read to preclude the filing
of unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Rela-
tions Board.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, re-

5 If this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States court of
appeals, the words in the notice reading “Posted by Order of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC. 9
strain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights guaranteed
you by Section 7 of the Act.
WE WILL, within 14 days from the date of this Order, offer
Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington full reinstatement to
their former jobs or, if those jobs no longer exist, to substantial-
ly equivalent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or
any other rights or privileges previously enjoyed.
WE WILL make Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington whole
for any loss of earnings and other benefits resulting from their
discharge, less any net interim earnings, plus interest com-
pounded daily.
WE WILL, within 14 days from the date of this Order, remove
from our files any reference to the unlawful discharge of Jen-
nifer Fultz and Clarise Washington, and WE WILL, within 3 days
thereafter, notify them in writing that this has been done and
that the discharges will not be used against them in any way.
WE WILL file with the Regional Director for Region 18, with-
in 21 days of the date the amount of backpay is fixed, either by
agreement or Board order, a report allocating the backpay
award to the appropriate calendar year.
WE WILL compensate Jennifer Fultz and Clarise Washington
for the adverse tax consequences, if any, of receiving one or
more lump-sum backpay awards covering periods longer than 1
year.
WE WILL revise or rescind any rules, policies, agreements
and/or provisions that would reasonably be read to prohibit
filing unfair labor practice charges.
ALORICA, INC., AND ITS SUBSIDIARY/AFFILIATE EXPERT
GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
The Administrative Law Judge’s decision can be found at
www.nlrb.gov/case/18-CA-190846 or by using the QR code
below. Alternatively, you can obtain a copy of the decision
from the Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board,
1015 Half Street, S.E., Washington, D.C. 20570, or by calling
(202) 273-1940.