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 employers) 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 ees consent to perform
  statutory duties