The National Labor Relations Board advanced a proposal for speedier union elections as the U.S. House debated Republican-sponsored legislation that would curb the agency’s powers.
The board, which resolves disputes between labor and management, voted 2-1 today to proceed by year-end with a scaled-back plan from Chairman Mark Pearce cutting the average time for elections. A June proposal to overhaul labor rules was opposed by groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which said companies will have less time to make their case to workers before an election.
“The current rule is laden with unnecessary delays,” Pearce said at a board meeting in Washington. The new proposal “seeks to avoid multiple and unnecessary appeals in union elections, and does away with unnecessary waiting periods.”
Republicans and business groups such as the National Association of Manufacturers said the board’s plan creates “ambush elections.” Labor leaders said the change won’t do much to help unions as representation among private companies fell to a record low 6.9 percent last year.
“It will make modest improvements,” Elizabeth Bunn, organizing director at the AFL-CIO, the nation’s largest union federation, said today at a Washington event. “It will not make the rules actually fair. All it will do is reduce some of the most egregious tactics.”
The Pearce proposal would simplify union election procedures and shorten the deadline for holding union elections after employees request a vote. The June proposal included more comprehensive changes, such as requiring employers to give worker phone numbers and e-mail addresses to union organizers.
Time is running short for the NLRB. The board has two vacancies, and the term of Democrat Craig Becker, a former lawyer for the AFL-CIO and Service Employees International Union, will expire next month, leaving two members and not enough for a quorum.
The decision by the NLRB to proceed with the scaled-back sets the stage for a final rule be drafted and circulated for a vote.
Becker said the debate on the proposal has been characterized by “reckless allegations and easy labeling.”
Brian Hayes, the only Republican on the labor board, had threatened to quit, according to Pearce, in a move aimed at blocking action on the proposal. Hayes today said he has ruled out resigning to deny the panel a quorum.
Hayes said he opposes the shorter time frame for elections under Pearce’s proposal.
“The net effect will be a shorter time between petition and election, in which many are deprived of the opportunity for a meaningful discussion on collective bargaining,” Hayes said.
Republicans in Congress are seeking to kill the NLRB’s proposal on elections. The House today will vote on a Republican-sponsored bill aimed at curbing the NLRB’s powers. The measure would delay any vote on a union for at least 35 days after a union petition is filed.
The bill must pass the Democratic-led Senate and be signed by President Barack Obama -- a union supporter -- to become law. Democratic lawmakers said today they will make sure Congress doesn’t limit the NLRB’s authority.
“We have to do everything in our power to stop them from dismantling the National Labor Relations Act,” Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who heads the Senate committee that deals with labor issues, said at the AFL-CIO event. “I will do whatever I can to stop this from happening.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Holly Rosenkrantz in Washington at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Larry Liebert at email@example.com