May 22, 2012

Congress seeks to block NLRB’s election rule changes

 

We’ve been following the NLRB’s controversial changes to union election case procedures. The proposed rules—which strip employers’ of their rights to litigate many issues in a hearing, limit parties’ appellate rights, and have the potential to dramatically decrease the time between the filing of a union election petition and the election—are currently set to take effect April 30, 2012.

Yesterday, Republicans in the House and Senate introduced resolutions to block the Board’s controversial rule changes. Senate Joint Resolution 36(introduced by Senator Enzi) and House Joint Resolution 103 (introduced by Congressman John Kline) seek to block the rule under the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to prevent federal agencies from implementing rules and regulations in certain instances.

The rules are also being challenged in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by the Chamber of Commerce and the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace. The parties have moved for summary judgment and are awaiting a ruling from the court.

We are monitoring these and other challenges to the Board’s attempts to expand its power through rulemaking and will continue to report on them.

©2012 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Justin F. Keith is an associate in the Boston office of Greenberg Traurig, LLP. He represents employers in all areas of labor and employment law, including litigation of discrimination, harassment and retaliation claims, reductions in force, and numerous other personnel and workplace issues. He frequently represents employers in wage & hour class and collective actions in state and federal court.  

617-310-6230

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.