Skip to main content

NLRB Provides Guidance on Common Issues That Arise With Mail In Ballot Elections

 

XPO Logistics Freight, Inc. - NLRB


Facts:  A union election took place via mail in ballot in August of 2020.  The Regional Office sent approximately 132 ballots to eligible employees.  Each of the ballots were included in kits which had instructions for how to return the ballots.  The election had a deadline for ballots to be returned by August 17th.  Ultimately, four unsigned ballots were received, one ballot with an employee’s name printed but not signed, and one damaged ballot that had been torn in half.

The Regional Office voided all six of these ballots which resulted in a 54 to 60 vote against unionization.  After the union raised a series of objections, the Regional Director held that the Regional Office had potentially disenfranchised some of the employees by not sending them duplicative voter kits so they could fix any issues with their initial ballots.  The Regional Director also held that the ballot that was torn in half (but had a “yes” vote) should have been counted.  The matter then went before the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”).

Analysis:  The NLRB looked at one particular ballot that was returned unsigned on August 14th.  While the Regional Director held that there was “sufficient time” for the Regional Office to mail the employee a duplicative voter kit, the NLRB disagreed.  Despite the fact that this employee lived near the Regional Office, August 14th to August 17th (when the first ballot was received and when the election ended) was not enough time for the employee to receive a return a second ballot.  Consequently, the NLRB held that because there was insufficient time for the Regional Office to send the employee the duplicative voter kit, the employee was not disenfranchised when the ballot was thrown out and a new one was not provided.

In regard to the ballot that had a “yes” vote but was returned torn in half, the NLRB disagreed with the Regional Director.  Relying upon a prior decision, Midland Steamship Line, Inc., the NLRB held that the Regional Director had to resort to speculation as to the possible meaning of the ballot being torn in half such that the ballot should be voided despite it having a “yes” vote.

The Takeaway:  This is a timely decision from the NLRB, in part given the ongoing vote count in the mail in election at the Amazon facility in Alabama.  This decision is a good reminder that while mail in elections might be favored by some (for ease of access to vote rather than having to do so in person), it also shows the risks that can arise if ballots are not properly completed or are damaged.  Had these ballots in question been counted, that would have impacted the final outcome of the election.  I am not necessarily saying that an in person election would have alleviated all issues...but the issues addressed in this decision would not have been a problem if the election had occurred in person.

Date:  March 23, 2021

Order:  https://apps.nlrb.gov/link/document.aspx/09031d45833cea06

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