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- Should the 2014 Election Rule be rescinded?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.
© 2026 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- Labor & Employment Law
- Employment Law
- Department of Labor
- Labor Law
- Wage & Hour
- FMLA
- NLRB
- EEOC
- Arbitration
- National Labor Relations Board
- FLSA
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Discrimination
- Holiday Policies
- Sexual Harassment
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Sixth Circuit
- Coronavirus
- Social Media
- Title VII
- Employer Policies
- Transgender Issues
- Religion Discrimination
- Employment Litigation
- Diversity
- Employer Rules
- Overtime Pay
- Workplace Violence
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- OSHA
- Artificial Intelligence
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Independent Contractor
- Joint Employer
- Telework
- Privacy
- Department of Justice
- Paid Leave Laws
- NLRA
- Compliance
- Tax Credit
- Supreme Court
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Workplace Accommodations
- Federal Trade Commission
- Worker Classification
- Litigation
- Harassment
- IRS
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Disability Discrimination
- Medical Marijuana
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- Race Discrimination
- ERISA
- ADAAA
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Whistleblower
- Disability
- United States Supreme Court
- 401(k)
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Environmental Law
- Securities Law
- Privacy Laws
- Preventive Care Benefits
- 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
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Social Media Content
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
Recent Posts
- Beyond Paid Time Off: The Legal Side of Holiday Policies
- EEO-1 Reporting on the Chopping Block: What Employers Need to Know
- DOL Proposes New Joint Employer Rule: What Employers Need to Know
- Arbitration Agreements Take a Hit: What the Sixth Circuit's EFAA Decision Means for Your Workplace Agreements
- Bourbon, Ballots, and Bargaining Orders: Sixth Circuit Rejects NLRB’s Cemex Framework
- Independent Contractor and Joint Employer Rules: Looking to the Past for Future Compliance
- New Requirements for Employers in California
- Back to the Office: The EEOC Clarifies the Limits of Telework Under the ADA
- EEOC Rescinds Anti-Harassment Guidance Addressing Transgender Protections
- The EEOC’s Renewed Focus on Employer DEI Programs in 2026
