The NLRB still living in the age of Pinkerton's. Did they ask employees if they want their personal information given to union thugs?

NLRB resurrects union election rule

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is resurrecting a controversial rule that would speed up union elections.The proposed regulation mirrors a proposal that was struck down in court in 2012, and would provide organizers with the email addresses and phone numbers of workers after a union election petition is filed. It would also consolidate appeals of union votes into a single post-election process and allow for electronic filing of union petitions, among other changes.

The regulation is certain to draw forceful opposition from business groups and Republican lawmakers, who say the rule is evidence of how the NLRB has tilted toward unions under President Obama.

In a statement on Wednesday, the NLRB said a notice of proposed rule-making (NPRM) will appear in the Federal Register on Thursday. The deadline for public comments on the rule will be April 7, and the NLRB plans to hold a hearing on the rule that same week.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg struck down the last version of the regulation on the grounds that only two board members participated in adopting it — not the required three to form a quorum. Boasberg, however, noted his ruling was not made on the merits of the rule.

The new rule is protected from a similar court challenge because it was passed with a quorum. All three Democrats on the labor board — NLRB Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and members Kent Hirozawa and Nancy Schiffer — approved reissuing the union election rule.

The two Republicans members of the NLRB, Philip Miscimarra and Harry Johnson III, dissented on the rule.

“I believe that the NPRM first proposed in June of 2011 continues to best frame the issues and raises the appropriate concerns for public comment,” Pearce said in a statement. “No final decisions have been made. We will review all of the comments filed in response to the original proposals, so the public will not have to duplicate its prior efforts in order to have those earlier comments considered. Re-issuing the 2011 proposals is the most efficient and effective rulemaking process at this time.”

Industry groups in Washington turned to the courts and to Capitol Hill to battle the original version of the regulation. Before Boasberg issued his decision, Senate Republicans failed to block the rule, after a motion of disapproval fell several votes short.

Unions have defended the proposal, saying it would limit delays for workers who want to organize.

“Unnecessary delay and inefficiencies hurt both employees and employers. These proposals are intended to improve the process for all parties, in all cases, whether non-union employees are seeking a union to represent them or unionized employees are seeking to decertify a union,” Pearce said.

Brian Hayes, a Republican NLRB member at the time that the rule was first proposed, threatened to resign in opposition. He decided to stay on but didn’t participate in the original proceedings, leading to the rule being overturned in court.

The labor board this year abandoned another rule that would have required employers to post notices informing workers of their rights to form a union. That regulation was also struck down in several courts.

The Supreme Court is also looking at the NLRB, weighing whether three recess appointments Obama made to the board were valid. Several justices questioned those picks during oral arguments in January.