[co-author: Ángel Rivera]*
The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico recently issued an important decision limiting the role of Puerto Rico’s courts in labor complaints that involve conduct governed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In Rodríguez Vázquez and Santana Marrero v. Hospital Español Auxilio Mutuo, 2025 TSPR 55, the Supreme Court held that Puerto Rico's courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate claims about conduct that is protected or prohibited by the NLRA, since these matters are preempted by federal law.
Two unionized nurses, members of the Unidad Laboral de Enfermeros y Empleados de la Salud (ULEES for its Spanish acronym), sued their employer, Auxilio Mutuo Spanish Hospital, for wrongful discharge and retaliation. They claimed they were terminated for participating as witnesses concerning an administrative complaint filed by their union before the Puerto Rico Department of Health. They brought their claims under Puerto Rico’s Act No. 115 (prohibiting retaliation) and Act No. 80 (governing unjust dismissals).
The Hospital moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that the claims involved matters covered by the NLRA and therefore under the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The plaintiffs responded that their claims actually arose under Puerto Rico labor statutes because the complaint filed with the PR Department of Health did not have the objective of promoting collective bargaining, procuring mutual assistance, or protecting unionized Hospital employees.
The Puerto Rico Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs’ contentions and held that local courts are preempted from hearing claims that fall under NLRB jurisdiction. The Court said it was not necessary for “concerted activity” (which the NLRA protects) to be explicitly mentioned in the complaint for the NLRB to have exclusive jurisdiction. Jurisdiction depends, it said, on the type of conduct involved—not on the nature of the remedies sought or statutes invoked. In this case the court found that plaintiffs’ participation in the administrative process was directly linked to advocacy for their union and fellow employees.
The Court noted that the plaintiffs, through their union, had filed an unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB asserting that virtually the same actions they challenged in the Puerto Rican court violated the NLRA. The Court said this reinforced the conclusion that the underlying conduct was primarily a federal concern. Where conduct is arguably protected or prohibited by the NLRA, the court concluded, the matter must be addressed exclusively by the NLRB. As a result, the Supreme Court revoked the lower court rulings and dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
*Law Clerk
