Search form

Two Newly Proposed Agency Rules Threaten to Hamper Employer Communications before Union Elections

By Philip B. Rosen and Thomas V. Walsh
  • June 21, 2011

The National Labor Relations Board has formally issued proposed rule changes that, if adopted, will drastically expedite the union election process.  The employer community has anticipated the NLRB’s move to seek to expedite the representation election process.  At recent Congressional hearings, Chairman Wilma Liebman hinted that such action was under active consideration.

Among other things, the Board proposes the following changes to the current process:

  • Accelerate the initial hearing date following the filing of a representation petition;
  • Mandate expansive pre-hearing discovery of issues;
  • Significantly curtail the ability to litigate issues before an election;
  • Eliminate the right to file post-hearing briefs;
  • Bar pre-election requests to review regional decisions;
  • Require lists of eligible voters be filed within only two days; and
  • Provide the union with voters’ phone numbers, e-mail addresses, and more.

Approximately 95 percent of all representation elections are held in 56 days.  The new procedures, if adopted, could shave approximately 30 days.  Under these changes, it appears elections could be held in slightly over three weeks (or possibly less) from the filing of a petition.

This is a profound change.  It has been long recognized that the more opportunity employees have to learn about unions and collective bargaining, the less likely they are to vote for union representation.  The proposed changes would cut that time by 50 percent. The need for employers to promote preventive labor relations in advance of union organizing is more important than ever. 

Employers’ ability to communicate with their employees also may become more challenging.  It is no coincidence that the Department of Labor has proposed a new rule that would make more activity of attorneys, consultants, and employers publicly reportable.  The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) requires reporting of arrangements, receipts, and expenditures derived from providing services called “persuader activity.”  Historically, attorney legal advice regarding lawful employer communications has been exempt from this LMRDA reporting requirement.  The DOL’s proposed rules would severely curtail this advice exception, rendering much of the advice provided by attorneys “reportable” under the law.  It is irrelevant that the employer’s communication is lawful.

For more than 50 years Jackson Lewis has counseled and advised employers with respect to their protected right to free speech and communication with their employees concerning the exercise of their rights to organize and bargain collectively.  Most companies and their law firms have fit within the legal advice exclusion over the years. This is likely to change if these new rules are adopted.

The impact of the proposed DOL rule will be to inhibit employers from effectively and lawfully communicating facts and opinions to employees prior to elections.  That, combined with the NLRB’s accelerated election procedure, will diminish greatly employees’ opportunities to obtain the information they need to make an informed choice in an NLRB election.

There is a 60-day public comment period for both proposals, followed by agency analysis and consideration, before final rules are promulgated.  The final rules are subject to court review.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will be working with the employer community to prepare comments to both rules and in any subsequent litigation. 

©2011 Jackson Lewis P.C. This Update is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice nor does it create an attorney/client relationship between Jackson Lewis and any readers or recipients. Readers should consult counsel of their own choosing to discuss how these matters relate to their individual circumstances. Reproduction in whole or in part is prohibited without the express written consent of Jackson Lewis.

This Update may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Jackson Lewis P.C. represents management exclusively in workplace law and related litigation. Our attorneys are available to assist employers in their compliance efforts and to represent employers in matters before state and federal courts and administrative agencies. For more information, please contact the attorney(s) listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

August 28, 2015

Labor Board Sets New Standard for Determining Joint Employer Status

August 28, 2015

A sharply divided National Labor Relations Board has announced a new standard for determining joint employer status under the National Labor Relations Act. Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., 362 NLRB No. 186 (Aug. 27, 2015). One of the most significant decisions issued by the Board in recent years, it is likely to impact the... Read More

August 17, 2015

NLRB Declines to Exercise Jurisdiction Over Student-Athletes’ Attempt to Unionize – For Now

August 17, 2015

Concluding that its assertion of jurisdiction “would not serve to promote stability in labor relations,” the National Labor Relations Board has declined to exercise authority over the College Athletes Players Association’s (CAPA’s) petition to represent scholarship football players at Northwestern University.... Read More

July 30, 2015

NLRB Doubles Down In Curbing Secrecy of Employer Investigations

July 30, 2015

In a case with potentially far-reaching implications, the National Labor Relations Board has issued a decision invalidating a confidentiality policy similar to that applied by many employers during workplace investigations. Banner Health System d/b/a Banner Estrella Medical Center, 362 NLRB No. 137 (June 26, 2015). The decision... Read More

Related Practices