Representation Elections

On Sunday, we reported on an eleventh-hour district court order striking down large portions of the NLRB’s new representation election rules that were set to go into effect on May 31, 2020. The district court order held certain portions of the rule were unlawful because they failed to follow proper

After an initial COVID-19 related delay, the sweeping new NLRB representation election rules that reversed the Obama-era “quickie” election process were about to go into effect on May 31, 2020.  However, an eleventh-hour district court order struck down a significant portion of the rule as unlawfully implemented for failing to

One area of controversy over the years is the NLRB’s attempt to interpret markings on representation ballots that are not clearly “yes” or “no.”  This has given rise to a number of tests for divining voter intent.  Overruling decades of conflicting precedent involving the interpretation of a voter’s intent, the

As most of the country’s workforce continues to adjust to the new realities of social distancing, stay-at-home orders, and limited travel, the practice of law and the forums for adjudicating disputes have shifted to video and telephonic hearings to ensure that the wheels of justice continue to turn notwithstanding COVID-19. 

The NLRB announced today in a press release that “[d]ue to the extraordinary circumstances related to the COVID-19 pandemic,” all representation elections, including mail ballot elections, will be suspended for the next two weeks, through and including April 3, 2020.  This means that any representation elections previously scheduled from

The National Labor Relations Board published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) on Monday, August 12, 2019, proposing three amendments to its current rules and regulations aimed at addressing representation election procedures – with potentially more to come.  The NLRB made sweeping changes to the election procedures through rulemaking in

There have been many precedent changing decisions coming from the NLRB in the last few years.  Few of these changes were more hotly contested, or farther reaching, than the Board’s decision in Browning-Ferris where it altered its longstanding joint employer test.  The new joint-employer test made it much more likely