Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

The NLRB Limits the Reach of Confidentiality and Non-Disparagement Provisions in Severance Agreements Overruling Trump-Era Policies

Client Alert


California Severance Agreement Requirements | Minnis & Smallets LLP |  Employment Law Attorney San Francisco

Employers should exercise caution and closely examine the content of severance agreements to ensure compliance with a recent National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) decision.  On February 21, 2023, the NLRB restricted the breadth of permissible language of confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses when it issued its decision in McLaren Macomb and overruled its Trump-era decisions in Baylor University Medical Center and IGT d/b/a International Game Technology.


Which employers are covered by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”)?


The NLRA covers most private sector employees, including manufacturers, retailers, private universities, and healthcare facilities.  It does not apply to federal, state, or local governments; employers in the agricultural sector; and employers involved in interstate railroads and airlines.  29 U.S.C. §152(2). 


Who is an employee?


An employee is a person without supervisory responsibilities and powers.  A supervisor is defined by the NLRA to be “any individual having authority, in the interest of the employer, to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them…”  29 U.S.C. §152(11).


The McLaren Macomb Decision


This case arose from a confidentiality and a non-disparagement provision present in a severance agreement that was presented to eleven employees that were permanently furloughed at the onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic.  The furlough occurred as a result of the federal government’s regulations prohibiting elective and outpatient procedures.  Also, “nonessential employees” were prohibited from working inside the hospital, necessitating a furlough, which was a common experience in the healthcare industry at that time.  The clauses at issue state,


Confidentiality Agreement.  The Employee acknowledges that the terms of this Agreement are confidential and agrees not to disclose them to any third person, other than spouse, or as necessary to professional advisors for the purposes of obtaining legal counsel or tax advice, or unless legally compelled to do so by a court or administrative agency of competent jurisdiction.


Non-Disclosure.  At all times hereafter, the Employee promises and agrees not to disclose information, knowledge or materials of a confidential, privileged, or proprietary nature of which the Employee has or had knowledge of, or involvement with, by reason of the Employee’s employment.  At all times hereafter, the Employee agrees not to make statements to Employer’s employees or to the general public which could disparage or harm the image of Employer, its parent and affiliated entities and their officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives.    


McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, 2 (2023).  The Board held that “Examining the language of the severance agreement here, we conclude that the nondisparagement and confidentiality provisions interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees’ exercise of Section 7 rights.”  Moreover, even “proffering” or presenting an employee with a severance agreement with such language constituted a violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA.  Id.


Regarding the non-disparagement provision, the Board reasoned that the provision was overly broad because it was not limited to just the Respondent-employer, but included “its parents and affiliated entities and their officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives” and also included no temporal limitation. 


As to the confidentiality provision, the Board was also concerned about the chilling effect on Section 7 rights of employees because it would prohibit the employee from providing information to the Board concerning the employee’s rights under the NLRA or cooperating with a Board investigation.  The Board affirmed, “established public policy that all persons with knowledge of unfair labor practices should be free from coercion in cooperating with the Board.” 


What is appropriate?


This decision creates cause for caution for covered employers.  Before a severance agreement is offered to an employee, employers should consult with legal counsel familiar with employment law issues to ensure that the agreement is compliant with McLaren Macomb. Careful revision of any potential severance agreements, especially confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions, should occur before offering a severance agreement to an employee as the NLRB has clearly returned to more restrictive standards.     

BMD’s Labor and Employment team is here to answer any questions employers may have about compliance with the NLRB's decision and other state and federal laws regarding employment. If you have any questions about this topic or wish to discuss, please contact Bryan Meek at or Angelina Gingo at

“In for a Penny, in for a Pound” is No Longer the Case for Florida Lawyers

On April 1, 2024, newly adopted Rule 1.041 to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedures goes into effect which creates a procedure for an attorney to appear in a limited manner in civil proceedings.  Currently, when a Florida attorney appears in a civil proceeding, he or she is reasonable for handling all aspects of the case for their client.  This new rule authorizes an attorney to file a notice limiting the attorney’s appearance to particular proceedings or specified matters prior to any appearance before the court.  For example, an attorney can now appear for the limited purpose of filing and arguing a motion to dismiss.  Once the motion to dismiss is heard by the court, the attorney may file a notice of termination of limited appearance and will have no further obligations in the case.

Enhancing Privacy Protections for Substance Use Disorder Patient Records

On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) finalized updated rules to 42 CFR Part 2 (“Part 2”) for the protection of Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) patient records. The updated rules reflect the requirement that the Part 2 rules be more closely aligned with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) privacy, breach notification, and enforcement rules as mandated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020.

Columbus, Ohio Ordinance Prohibits Employers from Inquiries into an Applicant’s Salary History

Effective March 1, 2024, Columbus employers are prohibited from inquiring into an applicant’s salary history. Specifically, the ordinance provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to:

The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board’s Latest Batch of Rules: What Providers Should Know

The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board has introduced new rules and amendments, covering various aspects such as CDCA certificate requirements, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, remote supervision, and reciprocity application requirements. Notable changes include revised criteria for obtaining a CDCA certification, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, and updated ethical obligations for licensees and certificate holders, including non-discrimination, confidentiality, and anti-sexual harassment measures.

Governor Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University Introduce the SOAR Study on Ohio Mental Illness

On January 19, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University announced a new research initiative, the State of Ohio Adversity and Resilience (“SOAR”) study, which will investigate all factors influencing Ohio’s mental illness and addiction epidemic.