May 25, 2012

Workplace Fairness Act Set to Move to the House Floor

On Oct. 26, 2011, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce voted to send the Workplace Democracy and Fairness Act (H.R. 3094) to the House floor. The proposed legislation is designed to rein in the activist National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) by counteracting the effects of its recent Specialty Healthcare decision. The proposed legislation also aims to prevent the NLRB from pursuing its proposed changes to the representation election process. While it's still early in the legislative process for this bill, H.R. 3094 is expected to go to the House floor and be voted on sometime in the winter.

The NLRB had long required that employees share "a sufficient community of interest" when determining which employees should be included within a bargaining unit. However, in Specialty Healthcare, the NLRB re-evaluated this standardand shifted the burden to employers to prove that excluded employees share an "overwhelming community interest" with the petitioned-for employees. As a result, the NLRB laid the groundwork for unions to more narrowly tailor bargaining units around pro-union sentiment (seeking to organize, for example, only a fragment of the workforce in the hopes of establishing an initial toehold).

Among other things, the proposed legislation would amend the National Labor Relations Act by requiring that the NLRB return to the "sufficient community of interest" standard.  In determining whether employees share a sufficient community of interest, the proposed legislation requires the NLRB to consider eight separate factors , including: (1) similarity of wages, benefits, and working conditions; (2) similarity of skills and training; (3) centrality of management and common supervision; (4) extent of interchange and frequency of contact between employees; (5) integration of the work flow and interrelationship of the production process; (6) the consistency of the unit with the employer's organizational structure; (7) similarity of job functions and work; and (8) the bargaining history in the particular unit and the industry.

The Act also aims to prevent the NLRB from pursuing its proposed rules designed to expedite the representation election process. Among other things, the proposed legislation provides employers at least 14 days to prepare their case before the first hearing on the matter. Additionally, the legislation mandates that no union election be held in fewer than 35 calendar days following the filing of an election petition. Finally, not earlier than seven days after the NLRB has determined the appropriate unit of employees, the legislation requires that the NLRB receive from the employer a list of all eligible voters and make the list available to the union.

© 2012 BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

About the Author

Barnes & Thornburg’s Labor and Employment Law Department is one of the fastest-growing labor groups in the nation. Two qualities set us apart: Our passion for what we do, and the pride we take in helping clients achieve their business goals. To succeed in the competitive global marketplace, our clients must not only meet but exceed their customers’ expectations. We share this objective, offering superior service, innovative ideas and an understanding of the challenges our clients face.

Our Services
The Labor and Employment Law group offers comprehensive...

317-231-7513

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.