Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, Circuit Judge Melloy, March 14, 2005 [ruling that Wal-Mart violated labor laws when it disciplined an employee for wearing a union t-shirt and announcing a union meeting to co-workers]. Excerpt:

Wal-Mart did not put forth any evidence of special circumstances akin to those present in Fabri-Tek that would justify the prohibition of Shieldnight's t-shirt. Although Shieldnight's shirt may have been more visible than the buttons in Fabri-Tek, Wal-Mart failed to demonstrate how the t-shirt interfered in any manner with the operation of the store. Accordingly, substantial evidence supports the Board's conclusion that Shieldnight's t-shirt did not constitute solicitation…

Nothing in the record suggests that the environment at Wal-Mart made Shieldnight's actions uniquely disruptive. Accordingly, the panel's conclusion regarding Shieldnight's conversations was supported by substantial evidence. Furthermore, the panel acted reasonably when it concluded that "simply informing another employee of an upcoming meeting or asking a brief, union-related question does not occupy enough time to be treated as a work interruption in most settings." Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 340 NLRB at *4.

Read the full text of the opinion here [PDF]. Reported in JURIST's Paper Chase here.