November 19, 2018

November 16, 2018

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

What is “Available” Voter Contact Information Under the Quickie Election Rule Remains Unclear for Now

The American Federation of Teachers Connecticut has withdrawn its petition to represent 866 full-time, part-time, and per-diem non-professional employees employed at Danbury Hospital. The move likely makes moot the employer’s appeal (Request for Review) of a National Labor Relations Board Regional Director’s ruling that the employer did not exercise “a reasonable amount of diligence” in its preparation of the voting list containing voters’ contact information. Danbury Hospital of the Western Connecticut Health Network, Case 01-RC-153086 (Oct. 16, 2015).

The union had lost an election among the 866 eligible voters in June 2015. The union thereafter filed “objections” with the NLRB seeking a re-run election. In the objections, the union alleged, among other things, that the voting list compiled by the employer was insufficient under the Board’s new rule. That rule, which became effective on April 14, 2015, requires employers to provide eligible voters’ names and addresses, as well as their available personal email addresses and cell phone numbers. The evidence showed that in compiling the voter list, the employer utilized information solely contained in one of its electronic databases. However, as determined by the Regional Director, the employer had other electronic and non-electronic sources of relevant contact information which it also should have accessed.

As a result of the withdrawal, clarity about what constitutes “a reasonable amount of diligence” and “available” information under the Board’s new quickie election rule likely will have to wait for another case. In the meantime, employers should use the Regional Director’s Danbury Hospital decision as a guideline for preparing a rule-compliant voting list if faced with a union petition. For more information see our blog post Act Two: Employer Failed to Provide Union with Available Voter Contact Information, NLRB Regional Director Finds.

Jackson Lewis P.C. © 2018


About this Author

Howard Bloom, Jackson Lewis, labor union attorney, unfair practice investigations lawyer, employment legal counsel, bargaining law

Howard M. Bloom is a Principal in the Boston, Massachusetts, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He has practiced labor and employment law representing exclusively employers for more than 36 years.

Mr. Bloom counsels clients in a variety of industries on labor law issues. He trains and advises executives, managers and supervisors on union awareness and positive employee relations, and assists employers in connection with union card-signing efforts, traditional union representation and corporate campaigns, and union decertification...

Philip B. Rosen Jackson Lewis  Preventive Practices Lawyer & Collective Bargaining Attorney

Philip B. Rosen is a Principal in the New York City, New York, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He is a member of the firm's Board of Directors and co-leads the firm's Labor and Preventive Practices Group. He joined the firm in 1979 and served as Managing Partner of the New York City office from 1989 to 2009.

Mr. Rosen lectures extensively, conducts management training, and advises clients with respect to legislative and regulatory initiatives, corporate strategies, business ethics, social media, reorganizations and reductions-in-force, purchase/sale transactions, sexual harassment and other workplace conduct rules, compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act, wrongful discharge and other workplace litigation, corporate campaigns and union organizing matters, collective bargaining, arbitration and National Labor Relations Board proceedings. He has been quoted by the press on many labor matters, including the National Labor Relations Board’s recent initiatives on protected concerted activity and the proposed Notice Posting requirements.

Mr. Rosen has extensive experience advising clients developing integrated corporate-wide labor relations strategies - whether the organization is union-free, partially unionized or entirely unionized. He has led teams conducting multi-facility labor-related legal assessments where clients are seeking to develop creative, strategic legal approaches which anticipate major issues and achieve a company’s labor relations goals. Mr. Rosen also has advised clients being confronted with corporate campaigns and requests for neutrality agreements. He has represented organizations seeking to maximize management rights through their development of pro-active employee relations approaches to remain union-free. He also has advised unionized organizations on lawful negotiating strategies – in situations ranging from “hard bargaining” to recapture management rights to more “cooperative” negotiations – in all cases, providing legal advice designed to assist clients in achieving their primary goals.