When workers want to vote on whether to form a union, they should have a fair chance to do so. 

The Problem:
Currently when employees decide to hold an election on whether to form a union, they encounter significant uncertainty and obstacles that make the process unfair. After workers petition the NLRB for an election, it can take months and even years before they get to cast a vote. Such delays cause unnecessary conflict and disruption in the workplace.

How the Rule Helps:
Modernizing the election process for forming a union creates a level playing field. Employers and workers alike are entitled to a process that cannot be manipulated to gain unfair advantage and is clear, precise, and efficient. Workers should have a fair chance to vote their preference.

Removing unfair obstacles and reducing needless litigation will reduce confrontation. Providing a clear, fair election process will improve stability and reduce confrontation in the workplace. The current NLRB process often creates unnecessary, protracted, and drawn-out legal maneuverings that damage labor relations, hurt productivity, impair safety, and disrupt commerce, in violation of the National Labor Relations Act’s intent. (1)

These modest changes will reduce needless bureaucracy and delays. The NLRB election process is bogged down with time-consuming, needless bureaucratic procedures, leaving the election timeline vulnerable to delay and manipulation and wasting government resources. As an investigation by Human Rights Watch concluded, the current system makes it possible to “drag out legal proceedings for years,” (2) all at the expense of workers’ rights.

Reducing choke points in the current system will cut back on unnecessary and costly litigation. The current process rewards unscrupulous employers who use litigation to stall an election date, often pursuing claims that are irrelevant or found to be without merit. Research shows that these delay tactics work: When employers pursue litigation, elections occur an average of 124 days after the petition was filed. (3) 

Every worker is entitled to a fair process to choose whether to form a union. The current lengthy and protracted election process sacrifices workers’ interests in having an election and, instead, promotes coercive and illegal activity. During organizing campaigns, more than one-third of companies fire pro-union workers.(4) The longer the election is delayed, the more likely the NLRB will charge employers with illegal misconduct. 

Companies will be free to express their opinion about union representation. From the first day workers are hired, companies have full access and ample opportunity to make their views clear to workers. In fact, nearly half of charges of illegal conduct filed with the NLRB during organizing campaigns involve employer misconduct that took place before workers filed a petition.(5)  

The NLRB’s Notice of Proposed Rule Making revises the representation process by removing unfair obstacles so that workers who petition for a vote on whether to form a union can have a vote.  The changes in the proposed rule are aimed at ensuring a fair process by cleaning up and modernizing a system paralyzed by delays, bureaucracy, and wasteful litigation.  The proposed process is more uniform, transparent, predictable and efficient.

The proposed rule:

• Provides for a predictable, fixed schedule for hearings, both pre- and post-election, when necessary, in order to promptly resolve issues in dispute when the parties cannot reach agreement.

• Allows for better management of the hearing process by discouraging the litigation of frivolous and irrelevant issues and by deferring, until after workers have had a chance to vote, the litigation of the eligibility or inclusion of individual employees affecting less than 20% of the bargaining unit.  Hearings will proceed on consecutive days; oral arguments will be encouraged and the filing of briefs discouraged.

• Consolidates appeals on election-related issues by eliminating the pre-election request for review and accompanying 25 day waiting period; all pre-election rulings remain subject to post-election review, unless rendered moot.  Board review of a regional director’s resolution of post-election disputes will be discretionary. 

• Modernizes the form and timeline for providing voter contact information currently required by the employer to the petitioning union.  Shortening the time for production from 7 days to 2 days (given the efficiencies of electronic recording keeping, retrieval and transmission) and including employees’ email addresses and phone numbers, if available, will promote an informed electorate; providing their work locations, shifts and job classifications will facilitate prompt resolution of voter eligibility issues.  The proposed rule would bar use of this information for any purpose other than the representation proceeding and related proceedings.

• Promotes the use of electronic technology to communicate with the parties to achieve economies of time and resources for the parties and the Board. 

The proposed rule issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ensures workers have a basic right we hold dear in this country: the right to vote. By eliminating voting delays and modernizing an outdated system, the rule removes unfair obstacles so that workers can vote on whether to form a union if they want to. It’s a step in the right direction toward giving more workers a voice on the job, rebalancing our economy and rebuilding the middle class. Opposition to these modest changes is based on politics.

Key Points:

This commonsense rule would ensure workers have a basic right we hold dear in this country—the right to vote.This rule removes unfair obstacles to give workers a fair chance to vote on whether to form a union.

Giving workers a fair chance to vote is essential to rebuilding our middle class.The right to join together on the job is one of the few ways to rebalance our economy and ensure that workers have good jobs that can support a family.

Eliminating excessive delays and litigation is good for employers, employees, and taxpayers who foot the bill. These modest changes will clean up a system plagued by delays, bureaucracy, and litigation. Currently, workers encounter delays of months and even years.Some never get to vote at all. This rule provides stability and a level playing field.

Today, millions of Americans are outofwork and struggling to get by, while CEOs are doing better than ever. Any bit of help for workers to get ahead in this economy is a good thing.

The opposition to these changes is pure politics. This year, we have already seen unprecedented attacks on workers’ rights.Whether you’re a teacher, firefighter or nurse’s aide – right-wing legislators and corporate lobbyists have made it clear that their ultimate aim is to take away your rights on the job. Those who are protesting these modest changes are the same corporate lobbyists and right-wing politicians who have been attacking workers’ rights across the country.

For Immediate Release                                
Contact: Josh Goldstein 202-637-5018

Statement by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka
on NLRB Election Standards
June 21, 2011

Although we are still reviewing the proposed newchanges from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), they appear to represent a common sense approach toclean up an outdated system and help ensure that working women and men can make their own choice about whether to form a union.

When workers want to vote on a union, they should get a fair chance to vote.  That’s a basic right.  But our current system has become a broken, bureaucratic maze that stalls and stymies workers’ choices.  And thatdiminishes the voice of working people, creates imbalance in our economy and shrinks the middle class. 

Withthe proposal of these new standards, the Board is taking a modest step to remove roadblocks and reduce unnecessary and costly litigation—and that’s good news for employers as well as employees.The proposed rule does not address many of the fundamental problems with our labor laws, but it will help bring critically needed fairness and balance to this part of the process.

Unfortunately, in today’s poisonous political environment, any action by the Board may unleash a torrent of attacks from politicians and ideologues opposed to any protection of workers’ rights. We call on leaders from both sides of the aisle to defend the independence of the NLRB. Political interference with any independent agency sets a dangerous precedent that should not be tolerated.

Post Date: February 20, 2012
Source: The Seattle Times
NLRB's top lawyer still feels fallout from Boeing, union case

Post Date: February 6, 2012
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
GOP's doublespeak on the NLRB

Post Date: February 2, 2012
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
NLRB crucial to protecting workers, employers

Post Date: January 10, 2012
Source: The Everett Herald
U.S. labor board overturns requirement for arbitration

Post Date: January 3, 2012
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
Why Obama must make recess appointments to the NLRB

Post Date: December 19, 2011
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
Rage against the NLRB

Post Date: December 19, 2011
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
Boeing settlement showcases the value of collective bargaining 

Post Date: December 15, 2011
Source: The Hill
Obama taps two for NLRB posts

Post Date: November 29, 2011
Source: The Hill's Congress Blog
What in the world is going on at the NLRB?

Post Date: November 22, 2011
Source: Working In These Times
Will GOP NLRB Member Resign to Shut Down Labor Agency?

Post Date: October 28, 2011
Source: The Seattle Times
Labor board headed for gridlock again

Post Date: October 25, 2011
Source: The Hill
GOP takes second crack at labor board

Post Date: October 18, 2011
Source: Labor Notes
NLRB May Lose Quorum in 2012, Suspending Recent Progress

Post Date: October 17, 2011
Source: Daily Kos
Hypocritical industry group attacks the National Labor Relations Board

Post Date: September 22, 2011
Source: Politico
GOP's NLRB funding move rejected

Post Date: September 22, 2011
Source: Free Republic
Senate panel rejects GOP bid to undercut NLRB

Post Date: September 21, 2011
Source: Tulsa World
U.S. House passes bill to undercut NLRB

Post Date: September 21, 2011
Source: Politico
SenateTargets NLRB in Spending Bill

Post Date: September 21, 2011
Source: The Daily Weekly
Labor/Employment GOP Looks to Punish NLRB for Boeing Case by Stripping It of Power

Post Date: August 24, 2011
Source: AFL-CIO Now Blog
Top Lawmakers Say Proposed NLRB Election Rule Ensures 'Greater Fairness'

Post Date: August 23, 2011
Source: AFL-CIO Now Blog...
Workers Back NLRB's Proposed Union Election Rule

Post Date: August 23, 2011
Source: Teamster.org...
Teamsters Strongly Support NLRB Proposed Election Changes

Post Date: August 23, 2011
Source: Motion Picture Editors Guild...
Boeing Forced to Turn Over Docs in NLRB Case

Post Date: July 21, 2011
Source: In These Times...
Pro-Business Rat Attends NLRB Hearing on Proposed Union Election Rule

Post Date: July 20, 2011
Source: AFL-CIO Now Blog...
What the Proposed NLRB Rules DO and DON'T

Post Date: July 20, 2011
Source: AFL-CIO Now Blog...
NLRB Gets Petition with 15,000 Signatures Supporting Rule Changes

Post Date: July 20, 2011
Source: AFL-CIO Now Blog...
 'We Need Somebody to Give Workers a Voice'

Post Date: July 20, 2011
Source: The Hill...
NLRB hearings will reveal future of labor law