At a public meeting held on November 30, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board ("Board") voted, 2-to-1, in favor of a resolution to adopt six procedural amendments to the rules governing representation elections under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") (although the Board's resolution did not include all portions of the proposed amendments contained in the June 2011 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking). Not surprisingly, the procedural changes adopted through the November 30, 2011 resolution will expedite the "representation election" process, to the detriment of employers.

The Board's November 30, 2011 Resolution Contains the Following Six Procedural Amendments:

1. Limits the scope of "pre-election hearings" to pure "questions of representation," meaning the hearing officer has authority to refuse consideration of certain ancillary concerns—possibly supervisory status, appropriateness of bargaining unit, etc.
2. Gives hearing officers discretion to disallow "post-hearing briefs," which currently are allowed as a matter of right. In other words, this amendment gives hearing officers authority to deny employers' written legal memoranda unless non-routine issues are involved.
3. Eliminates procedures for appeals of pre-election disputes filed prior to elections, instead consolidating pre-election disputes with post-election appeal procedures that currently emphasize only election-conduct issues
4. Eliminates the twenty-five to thirty-day waiting period between issuance of a Regional Director's Decision and Direction of Election and the scheduling of an election—which currently allows time to consider and present pre-election appeals.
5. Limits the circumstances under which a pre-election request for special permission to appeal (to review Regional Directors' rulings) to the Board would be granted to "extraordinary circumstances" when it appears that the issue addressed in the appeal would otherwise evade review.
6. Gives the Board discretion to deny post-election appeals of Regional Directors' post-election rulings—meaning the Board may dispose of post-election appeals that do not address "a serious issue for review."

The Following Controversial Portions of the June 2011 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are Not Included in the November 30, 2011 Resolution:

1. Inclusion of e-mail addresses and phone numbers within the voter-eligibility list furnished to unions before elections.
2. Electronic filing of petitions.
3. The requirement that hearings be set for seven days after service of the notice of hearing.
4. The requirement of a statement of position filing.
5. Change of the period for filing the voter list from seven to two work days.

Notwithstanding the November 30, 2011 resolution, the Board must now prepare its final rule and vote on it before the resolution takes effect (via majority approval). Complicating the matter is the fact that Board Member Craig Becker's recess appointment expires on December 31, 2011—meaning the Board will lose its three-member quorum and be unable to adopt rules or conduct business in any significant manner beyond December 31, 2011. Thus, it is anticipated that the Board will move quickly in the coming days and weeks to prepare and vote on the final rule.

Legal Disclaimer

The Employment and Labor Law Dispatcher Blog is made available by Ruder Ware to provide a general understanding of some of the legal issues relating to the transportation industry. This site does not provide specific legal advice and you should not use the information contained on this site to address your specific situation without consulting with legal counsel that is well versed in employment and labor laws and regulations. By using the Employment and Labor Law Dispatcher Blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and Ruder Ware or any individual attorney. Postings on this site do not represent the views of our clients. This site may link to other information resources on the Internet. These sites are not endorsed or supported by Ruder Ware, and Ruder Ware does not vouch for the accuracy or reliability of any information provided therein.

Please do not send any confidential information to anyone at the firm before an attorney-client relationship is formally established. Any email communication submitted in response to this blog will not be considered confidential and will not be protected from disclosure by attorney-client privilege.

For further information regarding the articles on this blog, contact Ruder Ware through our primary website, www.ruderware.com