Advertisement

June 18, 2013

NLRB’s “Quickie” Election Rule Held Unenforceable (For Now)

On December 22, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) published a highly controversial new rule significantly reducing the time between the filing of a representation petition and the holding of an election, giving employers little time to educate employees about their rights and the possible risks of unionization. The new rule also brought about other union-friendly changes, including considerably changing the procedure for challenging the voting unit. The new rule went into effect on April 30, 2012. Employers have now been given a (likely brief) respite from the implementation of the new rule on May 14, when the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that the new rule is unenforceable. IT NOW APPEARS THAT THE NLRB’S ENFORCEMENT OF THE NEW RULE WOULD VIOLATE THE D.C. DISTRICT COURT’S ORDER.

On May 14, in Chamber of Commerce v. NLRB, No. 11-cv-2262, the D.C. district court held that the NLRB’s new “quickie” election rule is unenforceable. The district court reasoned that the procedure used by the NLRB in promulgating the new rule was improper and that, as a result, the NLRB issued the new rule without satisfying the three-member quorum requirement. Because the NLRB lacked the quorum required to issue the new rule, the district court held that the new rule is unenforceable. The district court made clear, however, that its decision “need not necessarily spell the end of the final rule for all time” and that a validly constituted quorum of the NLRB may decide to adopt the same “quickie” election rule.

The D.C. district court’s invalidation of the new rule is a big win for employers. However, the win may very well be short-lived. The NLRB is free to re-issue the same “quickie” election rule after properly constituting a valid quorum. Even if the NLRB were to properly re-issue the same rule, however, the rule would still likely face challenges to its enforceability and, indeed, to its constitutionality. Accordingly, employers should stay informed of similar court decisions. One thing remains clear: the NLRB’s “quickie” election rule will continue to be the subject of much litigation, and employers are well-advised to stay informed of such developments and to prepare their workplace for a potential increase in union activity. 

© 2013 Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg LLP.

About the Author

Partner

Howard L. Bernstein represents employers throughout the U.S. in labor relations and employment law matters and employment-related litigation, with an emphasis on contract negotiations, arbitrations and injunction proceedings, NLRBelection campaigns, unfair labor practice cases and employment discrimination matters.

312-269-8447

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.