Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
invalidated the National Labor Relations Board's
("NLRB") election rule that went into effect on April 30,
2012. The election rule limited representation hearings to the
issue of whether an election should take place, decreased the
amount of time between when a union files a petition for an
election and when the election takes place, limited the appeals
process and increased discretion of the NLRB Regions during
representation hearings.
The district court struck down the rule because the NLRB did not
have the necessary quorum when it voted on the final rule in
December 2011. The National Labor Relations Act requires a quorum
of at least three members of the NLRB's five-member board
before it can validly conduct business for the agency.
When the NLRB published the final rule that amended the election
procedures, only two of its members voted in favor of adopting the
rule. At the time, there were two vacant seats. The NLRB's
third seated member, Brian Hayes, did not cast a vote. Hayes had
voted against the initial rulemaking and against proceeding with
the drafting and publication of the final rule. However, he did not
participate in the vote on the final rule. He received a
notification that the final rule had been circulated for a vote,
but he took no action in response. Nevertheless, the NLRB
determined he had "effectively indicated his
opposition."
The court's ruling found that member Hayes "cannot be
counted toward the quorum merely because he held office, and his
participation in earlier decisions relating to the drafting of the
rule does not suffice. He need not necessarily have voted, but he
had to at least show up." The adoption of the rule by only two
board members was insufficient. There was no quorum. Without it,
the NLRB was without power to issue rules for the agency.
The court's invalidation of the new election rule is one of a
series of recent federal court decisions that have invalidated new,
recently published rules by the NLRB. The court's holding is
welcome news to employers, given that the rule would have limited
the opportunity to communicate with employees after a union has
filed an election petition with the NLRB.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
