Skip to main content

Republican Senator Introduces Legislation to Repeal "Ambush Election" Rule


Recently, Republican Senator Lamar Alexander (who is also Chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions) introduced legislation to repeal the "ambush election" rule which came into existence during the Obama administration.  The rule, frequently criticized by Republicans and pro-employer groups, aimed to speed up the union election process by restricting court challenges prior to an election.  Under this rule, a union election can occur in as little as 11 days...a far cry from the prior 25 day delay that normally occurred between the time a regional director directed an election and the election itself actually occurring.  Critics of this rule have continually pointed out that this small time frame gives employers little notice to figure out what is going on before the election even occurs.  Consequently, employers are given little time to prepare for a union election and potentially fight the unionization, if they so choose.  The rule further provides that employers must provide union organizers with all available personal addresses and phone numbers for workers who are eligible to vote.

Under Senator Alexander's proposed legislation, the minimum amount of time necessary to conduct union elections would be lengthened to 35 days.  In addition, to protect employees' privacy, Alexander's legislation further dictates that the NLRB would determine the appropriate group of employees to include in the union before the union's certification.  Further, employers would be given at least 7 days to provide a list of employee names and one additional piece of contact information.  (Under the current rule, as written, employers are now required to provide names, cell phone numbers, and potentially even work schedules...even if the employee chose to reject unionization).

Of course, this bill is still in the early stages of working its way through Congress.  However, with Republicans having majority control of Congress (and chairing the related committees), this bill might stand a chance if Republicans can move the bill along and have its members vote along party lines. The question is whether any Democrats would join?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more