Detroit Edison

1. “The company raised no objection to the Board's order on the ground that the scope of information required was too broad or that disclosure would put an undue burden on the company. . . . Thus we lay to one side the suggestion by the company here that the Board's order might be unduly burdensome or injurious to its business” (emphasis added). NLRB v. Truitt Mfg. Co., 351 U.S. 149, 151 (1956).

2. Detroit Edison • A Union request for relevant information does not necessarily mean employer interests will not be taken into account • request must not place an undue burden on the employer • Board must take into account employer interests in evaluating union information requests • requiring er provision to union of test batteries and answer sheets does not take into account er interest in test security • disclosure would invalidate tests • prohibitive costs of creating new valid tests

3. Detroit Edison (cont.) • Board must take “(o)ther interests” (in addition to employer’s) into account in evaluating Union information requests (e.g., waiver issue) • employee interests in confidentiality of test scores • minimal burden on union to obtain employee consent/waivers • Note Court unwillingness to permit guidelines of a private group (APA) to negate NLRA requirements

4. Detroit Edison Dissent • No reason to believe that Union will disclose test questions and answer sheets • No reason to be concerned about inadvertent disclosure • Union has statutory right to view info without a third party intermediary • Small marginal intrusion on ees confidentiality interests • Union should not need ee’s consent to perform statutory duties