The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has rejected the National Labor Relations Board's request to alter a recent federal court decision invalidating a December 2011 NLRB ruling expediting union elections, according to an AHA News Now report.
In May 2012, a federal district court judge in Washington, D.C., invalidated an NLRB final rule — which would have sped up union elections and limited participation in pre-election hearings — after the Chamber of Congress and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace challenged the NLRB rule in court.
When the five-member labor board voted in December 2011 on its final rule, only two members present voted to expedite union elections, less than the quorum requirement. However, the board chose to move ahead with the rule.
In its recent challenge to the District Court's decision to invalidate the final rule, the NLRB introduced new evidence of an "electronic voting room" used during the December vote. It argued that one of its members not present at the time of the vote, Brian Hayes, was present but chose to abstain from the vote, which would have made the final rule valid because the body had met the three person minimum for a quorum.
Mr. Hayes' deputy chief counsel electronically opened a "voting task" the day of the election, which establishes he was participating in the voting process and subsequently abstained from the vote, according to NLRB's affidavit.
However, the U.S. District Court denied NLRB's recent challenge based on the fact that the new evidence was not made known in the original Court hearing, and that it still does not establish Mr. Hayes actually intended to abstain from the vote. On the contrary, the Court found that Mr. Hayes' written statement in the final rule "effectively indicated his opposition" to it.
Read the Court's full decision here.
Surprise NLRB Policy Change Prompts Reaction From House Committee
Federal Judge: NLRB's Expedited Union Election Rule Invalid
In May 2012, a federal district court judge in Washington, D.C., invalidated an NLRB final rule — which would have sped up union elections and limited participation in pre-election hearings — after the Chamber of Congress and Coalition for a Democratic Workplace challenged the NLRB rule in court.
When the five-member labor board voted in December 2011 on its final rule, only two members present voted to expedite union elections, less than the quorum requirement. However, the board chose to move ahead with the rule.
In its recent challenge to the District Court's decision to invalidate the final rule, the NLRB introduced new evidence of an "electronic voting room" used during the December vote. It argued that one of its members not present at the time of the vote, Brian Hayes, was present but chose to abstain from the vote, which would have made the final rule valid because the body had met the three person minimum for a quorum.
Mr. Hayes' deputy chief counsel electronically opened a "voting task" the day of the election, which establishes he was participating in the voting process and subsequently abstained from the vote, according to NLRB's affidavit.
However, the U.S. District Court denied NLRB's recent challenge based on the fact that the new evidence was not made known in the original Court hearing, and that it still does not establish Mr. Hayes actually intended to abstain from the vote. On the contrary, the Court found that Mr. Hayes' written statement in the final rule "effectively indicated his opposition" to it.
Read the Court's full decision here.
More Articles Related to the NLRB:
NLRB: Limiting Off-Duty Employee Access Violates National Labor Relations ActSurprise NLRB Policy Change Prompts Reaction From House Committee
Federal Judge: NLRB's Expedited Union Election Rule Invalid