Thursday, August 4, 2011

Lawsuit Threat Against New NLRB Election Rules

NLRB This isn't unexpected, but we have confirmation that, if the NLRB promulgates something close to what it has proposed in its new election rules, legal challenges will be forthcoming.  An official at the Chamber of Commerce has all but promised that the group--no doubt joined by others--will challenge many of the proposed rules.  The group appears concerned about the attempt to speed up the election, which would occur by, among things, allowing electronic petition filing, decreasing pre-election challenges, and speeding up administration of elections.

Perhaps I'm being naive, but I don't see much hope for such a suit except to possibly delay the rules' implementation.  The Chamber's argument appears to be that faster elections deprive employers their right to express their opinions about unionism.  That argument seems really weak as a legal matter because there is no right to an extended period of time of expressing its opinion.  Even if a judge isn't sympathetic to the employer coercion concerns underlying these changes, he or she would have to turn a blind eye to decades of administrative law demanding deference in this context.  Indeed, courts have repeatedly held that the NLRB is entitled to the most deference when establishing election rules.  So, I don't see this as a serious threat to whatever the Board comes out with (unless, of course, some procedural requirement wasn't complied with).

Finally, speaking of required procedures, you can access transcripts and video of the Board's two-day public meeting on the rules here.

Hat Tip:  Patrick Kavanagh


Labor and Employment News, Labor Law | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Lawsuit Threat Against New NLRB Election Rules:


Make no mistake, the rule of law will be next on the list of rabid dog right wing attacks - time to renew your ACLU membership - these people are not kidding and won't be happy until the minimum wage is abolished and workplace protections are dismantled

Posted by: Vickie Pynchon | Aug 4, 2011 10:23:31 PM

And the rule of law is already on the list of rabid dog left-wing attacks through administrative fiat (snap election rules; changing RLA rules to violate the plain language of the statute) which wouldn't stand a prayer in Congress --- time to renew your oath to the Constitution --- these people are not kidding and won't be happy until the minimum wage is set at $100 per hour, and faux, Harrison-Bergeron-type equality --- except for those who are "more equal than others," of course --- is mandated by law.

There. Don't we all feel better now?

Posted by: James Young | Aug 6, 2011 2:01:48 PM

And there you have it. Two awesome caricatures. One of the left, and one of the right, by one from the left and one from the right.

I can sleep knowing that both are redonkulous.

Posted by: Per Son | Aug 7, 2011 5:47:17 AM

More false equivalency. Mercifully (I guess), all views cannot be correct and time will, after all, tell.

Posted by: Michael Duff | Aug 7, 2011 3:01:15 PM

If the Chamber of Commerce is represented by former Board Member and General Counsel Ron Meisburg, the Board has nothing to worry about. He isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed.

Posted by: Dave | Aug 7, 2011 8:13:54 PM

The difference, "Per Son," is that mine was written AS a caricature. Sad to say, I'm under the impression that the first comment was not.

Posted by: James Young | Aug 8, 2011 6:25:36 PM

Post a comment