Get access to the exclusive HR Resources you need to succeed in 2018!
SHRM board member David Windley discusses how unconscious bias can derail workplace diversity efforts.
Is your employee handbook keeping up with the changing world of work? With SHRM's Employee Handbook Builder get peace of mind that your handbook is up-to-date.
Build competencies, establish credibility and advance your career—while earning PDCs—at SHRM Seminars in 12 cities across the U.S. this spring.
#SHRM18 will expand your perspective – on your organization, on your career, and on the way you approach HR. Join us in Chicago June 17-20, 2018
Members may download one copy of our sample forms and templates for your personal use within your organization. Please note that all such forms and policies should be reviewed by your legal counsel for compliance with applicable law, and should be modified to suit your organization’s culture, industry, and practices. Neither members nor non-members may reproduce such samples in any other way (e.g., to republish in a book or use for a commercial purpose) without SHRM’s permission. To request permission for specific items, click on the “reuse permissions” button on the page where you find the item.
HR professionals heard dire warnings during a Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) webcast July 28, 2011, about a strengthened union environment that would undermine employers if regulatory changes from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) are approved.
webcast looked at two union-related regulations—the NLRB’s so-called “quickie election” proposed rule and the DOL’s “persuader activity” proposal.
The first would, among other things, shorten the election period and give employers less time to communicate their views on unionization to employees.
The second would change the interpretation of the “advice” exemption, which applies to employers’ and other third parties’ communications to employees about their right to organize and bargain collectively. It would broaden the scope of the types of activities employers must disclose during a union campaign.
The webcast featured attorney and former NLRB chairman Peter C. Schaumber and attorney G. Roger King of law firm Jones Day. The program qualifies for 1.5 strategic management credits toward PHR and SPHR recertification.
The 90-minute program centered mostly on the changes to union elections that the NLRB proposed July 21, 2011, but included comments about the DOL’s June 20, 2011, proposed regulation affecting “persuader activity.”
In addition, it looked at the board’s makeup and how it has become more politicized over the years as presidents appoint, with Senate approval, members who reflect an administration’s political leanings. NLRB members serve five-year terms.
Schaumber served on the NLRB from 2002 to 2010 as an appointee of President George W. Bush and as board chair from 2008-2009. Prior to his appointment, he was a labor arbitrator serving on a number of industry panels and national arbitration rosters.
King represents employers in collective bargaining negotiations; grievance and arbitration matters; and issues that arise under the National Labor Relations Act, state and federal equal employment statutes, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Both men have been speaking out against the NLRB proposal. Schaumber shared his personal concerns before the House Education and Workforce Committee on July 7, 2011.
King represented SHRM at a July 19 public hearing before the NLRB.
In his July 28 webcast remarks, Schaumber said the NLRB is trying to enact “EFCA Light,” a reference to the union-backed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) that would change how employees vote for union representation. EFCA stalled in the Senate in 2009.
“The current board is animated by concern [that] organized labor has lessened in the private sector,” and is working to change that with these regulations, Schaumber said during the webcast.
He described the current board as “highly partisan and in favor of organized labor … making [union] organizing easier.” Unions currently win about 67 percent of election votes, said Schaumber, who thinks the NLRB’s underlying reason for the rule change is to increase unions’ win rate.
King, noting that the NLRB has issued nine separate initiatives in the last 10 months, called them “a tsunami of regulations.”
NLRB is made up of chairman and union attorney Wilma Liebman, Democrat; union attorney Craig Becker, Democrat; labor lawyer Mark Pierce, Democrat; and congressional staff counsel Brian Hayes, Republican, who voted against the proposed changes. Terence F. Flynn, Republican, has been nominated to fill the seat of Schaumber, also a Republican, whose term expired August 2010. Liebman’s term expires Aug. 27, 2011; Becker’s term expires in fall 2011. Both could be reappointed.
Schaumber and King think the current NLRB is strengthening union power by making it easier to organize unions, allowing union access to employer premises, restricting employer speech, and streamlining a process that will lead to speedier union elections.
The NLRB’s and DOL’s intent, King said, is “chilling employer free speech.”
The speakers also decried what they called the NLRB’s attempts to sanction micro bargaining units, which are not mentioned in the NLRB proposed changes. Micro unions would allow as few as two employees working the same job to be considered a bargaining unit, making it easier for workers to organize. This means “the employer will have to negotiate and apply multiple collective bargaining units,” Schaumber said.
NLRB said its amendments are intended “to reduce unnecessary litigation, streamline pre- and post-election procedures, and facilitate the use of electronic communications and document filing.”
Among the proposed changes:
The proposed amendments have sparked opposition from various groups, including law firms, the
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation, and SHRM.
In a statement, Liebman predicted the NLRB’s proposals would be controversial.
“The proposed rule changes involve only the mechanics of the representation-case procedures created by the board itself,” the NLRB chair stated.
“They do not involve the other, lawful method of achieving union representation, voluntary recognition through card-check or other means … regulate how election campaigns are run by unions or employers, where or how the elections are conducted, what bargaining units are appropriate, or any of the other substantive election issues that the board regulates … [and] do not establish inflexible time deadlines or mandate that elections be conducted a set number of days after the filing of a petition.”
Comments on the NLRB’s proposed changes are due by Aug. 22, 2011, and may be submitted electronically at
http://www.regulations.gov or via mail to Lester A. Heltzer, Executive Secretary, NLRB, 1099 14th Street NW, Washington, DC 20570.
SHRM will submit official comments to DOL and NLRB; state councils and chapters may co-sign SHRM’s official comments. SHRM members also may submit individual comments to
www.regulations.gov and forward personal comments to their members of Congress
using HRVoice by Aug. 22, 2011. SHRM members may attend meetings with their congressional representatives while those members are on recess during August.
Kathy Gurchiek is associate editor for HR News.
Obama Administration Proposes Two Landmark Labor Rules, SHRM Government Affairs
HR News Update e-Newsletter, July 2011
You have successfully saved this page as a bookmark.
Please confirm that you want to proceed with deleting bookmark.
You have successfully removed bookmark.
Please log in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Please sign in as a SHRM member before saving bookmarks.
Please purchase a SHRM membership before saving bookmarks.
An error has occurred
Recommended for you
SHRM Annual Conference & Exposition
SHRM’s HR Vendor Directory contains over 3,200 companies