The case you cite was overturned by the DC circuit and sent back to the NLRB for reconsideration a year or two ago. The NLRB found again last month in favor of

The case you cite was overturned by the DC circuit and sent back to the NLRB for reconsideration a year or two ago. The NLRB found again last month in favor of the CWA, and it will be appealed again (and the CWA will lose again) to the DC circuit, because it is in, fact, true. If the employer says "we want to hear what you think can be better about your pay, your benefits, or your work schedules", there is nothing illegal about this. Even if it creates groups to do so. To the degree the NLRA tries to ban this, it would be struck down as applied. Courts will construct it to focus on the bargaining aspects of a union rather than speech aspects. This is very clear from precedent, and in line with what happened at the DC circuit. None of the unions have been dumb enough to spin the wheel here because the result is obvious. If they tried to control non-union speech-related feedback loops, it would fair very poorly, and has so far in court. It is true the NLRA tries to ban company unions, but the part most likely to stand these days, is again, effectively "company controlled collective bargaining" (IE the company elects representatives and only bargains with a company controlled/elected union), etc. Again, i'm not stating a position of whether this is good or not, just trying to accurately state the current legal reality.