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- Should the 2014 Election Rule be rescinded?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.
© 2021 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Associate
Greg Robinson’s practice is concentrated in the area of labor and employment law. He has counseled clients on a wide array of employment matters, including wage and hour disputes, discrimination charges, and issues involving ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Employment Law
- Coronavirus
- Labor Law
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- NLRB
- Discrimination
- Department of Labor
- IRS
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Retirement
- Arbitration
- NLRA
- Employer Policies
- ERISA
- Race Discrimination
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Accommodation
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Litigation
- Social Media
- Reasonable Accommodation
- National Labor Relations Act
- National Labor Relations Board
- Employer Handbook
- Employment Litigation
- EEOC
- Wage & Hour
- 401(k)
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Title VII
- ADAAA
- Workplace Accommodations
- Sexual Harassment
- Employer Rules
- Unions
- Transgender Issues
- Technology
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Securities Law
- Privacy
- FMLA
- Disability
- Workplace Violence
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Sixth Circuit
- Disability Discrimination
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- OSHA
- Overtime Pay
- Religion Discrimination
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Representative Election Regulations
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Department of Justice
- Benefits
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Environmental Law
- Privacy Laws
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Healthcare Reform
- Telecommuting
- Electronically Stored Information
- Affirmative Action
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Compensable Time
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Classification
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Misclassification
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- Taxation
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Antitrust
Recent Posts
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Termination Done Right - Part 1
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Welcome 2021 - 5 Things for Employers to Consider
- Congressional Proposal Extends Tax Credits to Companies Providing Paid Leave, but Allows Requirement to Expire
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: EEOC Issues New Guidance on COVID-19 Vaccinations
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Non-Compete Agreements - Five Mistakes by Three Parties
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Employment At-Will – Myth or Reality?
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: COVID-19 Immunity Laws
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Reductions in Force - Key Factors to Consider
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast
- 5 Things Employers Should Know About Military Leave