What a difference a presidency makes. Under President Trump, the National Labor Relations Board is continuing to take steps to distance itself from some of the more controversial decisions it issued during the administration of President Barack Obama. This latest action came on January 26, 2018, when the Board announced it was extending the deadline for filing responses to the Board's Request for Information, regarding the Board’s Representation Election Regulations.
In December, 2014, the NLRB issued new rules to its Representative Election Regulations in an effort to streamline the election process. These regulations, largely seen as benefiting the interests of labor unions, were met with criticism from the business community, as well as from Republicans in Congress. Among other changes, this new rule required Employers to provide Unions specific information regarding all their employees, limited the issues that an Employer may address at a pre-election hearing, and eliminated the waiting period between the announcement of the decision to hold an election, and the election itself. This last change proved to be especially controversial as it hampered an Employers ability to respond to a union’s campaign, and inspired the rules moniker - the “Quickie Election Rule.”
In 2015, Congress passed a joint-resolution to overturn these regulations, but that resolution was vetoed by President Obama and the rule went into effect. But as this blog has previously shown, the Trump administration has shown to be aggressive in reversing Obama-era decisions. On December 11, 2017, the NLRB published a Request for Information, seeking information from interested parties regarding the 2014 Rule. Specifically, the Board asked:
- Should the 2014 Election Rule be retained without change?
- Should the 2014 Election Rule be retained with modifications? If so, what should be modified?
- Should the 2014 Election Rule be rescinded? If so, should the Board revert to the Representation Election Regulations that were in effect prior to the 2014 Election Rule’s adoption, or should the Board make changes to the prior Election Regulations. If the Board should make changes to the prior Election Regulations, what should be changed?
This request, which was published over the dissent of two NLRB Board Members, originally required responses to be filed by Monday, February 12, 2018. In its Request for Information the Board sought information from unions, employers, associations, labor-law practitioners, academics, members of Congress, anyone from the general public who wished to provide information, as well as the views of the new NLRB General Counsel, Peter Robb, and the Regional Directors who had experience working with the 2014 Rule. The Board contrasted this Request for Information with the process used to enact the 2014 Rule, which it criticized for starting with a lengthy proposed rule outlining dozen of changes without any prior requests from the public. With this deadline pushed back to now March 19, 2018, any interested party will have more time to craft a submission for consideration.
For critics of this rule, the fact that the Board has requested information is an encouraging sign that changes may soon be on the way. Should the Board take action to revise or rescind the 2014 Rule, an announcement would come at some point following the March 19, 2018 deadline. Stay tuned to this blog for any additional updates along the way.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2025 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Partner
Greg Robinson assists his clients in navigating the complex world of workplace laws and regulations. He has counseled clients on a wide array of employment matters, including wage and hour disputes, discrimination charges ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Employment Law
- Labor & Employment Law
- Discrimination
- EEOC
- Tax Credit
- Title VII
- Overtime Pay
- Social Media
- Religion Discrimination
- Employer Policies
- Labor Law
- Employment Litigation
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Coronavirus
- Employer Rules
- Wage & Hour
- Department of Labor
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- NLRB
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Artificial Intelligence
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- OSHA
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Compliance
- FLSA
- National Labor Relations Board
- Department of Justice
- Worker Classification
- Privacy
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Supreme Court
- NLRA
- Harassment
- Arbitration
- Diversity
- FMLA
- Federal Trade Commission
- Workplace Accommodations
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Litigation
- IRS
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Medical Marijuana
- Disability Discrimination
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- Race Discrimination
- ERISA
- ADAAA
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Technology
- Sexual Harassment
- Whistleblower
- Federal Arbitration Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Transgender Issues
- Disability
- 401(k)
- Sixth Circuit
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Paycheck Protection Program
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Securities Law
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Privacy Laws
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Telecommuting
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Misclassification
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- Work Opportunity Tax Credit At Risk: Use It Before You Lose It
- IRS Releases Additional Guidance on New Tip and Overtime Tax Deductions for 2025
- EEOC Takes Aim at Perceived Anti-American Bias
- Ohio “Mini-WARN” Act Now In Effect: Key Compliance Takeaways for Employers
- EEOC's Renewed Focus on Religious Discrimination: What Employers Need to Know
- No Free Delivery: Misclassification Comes at a Price
- One Tweet Away From Trouble: Social Media at Work
- Outsourcing Hiring Won’t Outsource Risk: Implications for Employers Using AI in Hiring
- No Intent, No Liability: Sixth Circuit Narrows Employer Liability for Third-Party Harassment
- AI in Hiring: The Promise, the Pitfalls, and the Response
