Trend Alert: NLRB Holds Employee Acting Alone Engages in Concerted Activity
1 min read
Aug 4, 2015
The NLRB, and courts interpreting the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), consistently have held that to engage in concerted activity protected by Section 7, two or more employees must take action for their mutual aid or protection regarding terms and conditions of employment. Key takeaways: "two or more" and "mutual." But, as the title of this article suggests, even a lone wolf may fall within this definition in certain circumstances.
On July 29, 2015, the NLRB generously expanded the definition of "concerted" when it held a single employee, acting alone and without the consent of his peers, engaged in protected activity. In the suit, 200 East 81st Restaurant Corp., discharged waiter, Marjan Arsovski, claimed his former restaurant employer engaged in wage and hour violations under to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The suit was filed as a collective action, which differs from a class action in that class members are not automatically presumed to be included in the class; rather, members must affirmatively "opt in" to the action. Here, Arsovski was the only named plaintiff and there was no credible evidence to suggest he planned or discussed the filing of the complaint with other employees or that other employees were interested in "opting in." Despite this, and despite the fact that the NLRB has no jurisdiction over FLSA claims, the Board held that in filing the complaint, Arsovski was seeking to initiate or induce group action and, therefore, engaged in protected concerted activity.
The Board's opinion suggests that any collective or class action could implicate Section 7 protection. Employers need to be very aware of this potentially significant trend: employers must now consider potential liability under the NLRA even in circumstances where the NLRB has no jurisdiction over the claim at issue and even when a single employee is involved. Hinshaw will be tracking this issue closely to see how the Board continues to develop this area of the law.
Featured Insights

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

In The News
Jul 29, 2026
Hinshaw Authors Contribute Two Articles in Latest Edition of the CCFL Quarterly Report

Webinar
Jul 28, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie and Sabrina Janeiro Present on Legal AI Technology

In The News
Jul 27, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses How the Insurance Industry Contributed to the 2026 FIFA World Cup

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Jul 27, 2026
Compliance Guidance for the New Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act (VDPOSA)

Healthcare Alert
Jul 24, 2026
Q&A: Right to Electronic Monitoring Extended to Illinois Assisted and Shared Living Facilities

Press Release
Jul 23, 2026
Insurance Partner Christophe Burusco Joins Hinshaw in Los Angeles

In The News
Jul 16, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Anticipates Epic Battle Between “Titans of the Antitrust Bar”

