SHRM, U.S. Chamber Sue to Block NLRB “Quickie” Election Rules

By Eric B. Meyer

It’s on now!

Yesterday, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce announced that it had filed a complaint in federal court against the National Labor Relations Board to strike the NLRB’s election rules, passed last month, which would create faster union elections.

Joining the Chamber as plaintiffs in the lawsuit are the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace (CDW), National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), National Retail Federation, and the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

Déjà vu with the NLRB”

A spokesman for the CDW emphasized that the lawsuit was necessary to protect an election system that has worked for decades:

For nearly 70 years, the NLRB’s election procedures have ensured employees have reasonable time to gather the facts before they cast a ballot for or against union representation. The NLRB’s rule abandons over a half century of successful elections to put the demands of politically powerful unions ahead of employees’ rights to make informed choices and employers’ rights to due process and free speech. This rule was designed to reduce, rather than increase, information for employees and entirely contradicts the spirit behind the President’s promise to have the most transparent administration in history.”

NAM Senior Vice President and General Counsel Linda Kelly described the new election rules as “déjà vu with the NLRB, and American employees are hurt the most by these recycled policies.”

Article Continues Below

Hindering the ability “to make an informed choice”

SHRM’s President and CEO Hank Jackson also underscored that these rules will have on American employees:

The changes unfairly hinder the ability of employees to make an informed choice about whether or not to join a union. This rule is the latest and most sweeping action by the NLRB to tilt the process toward unionization and prevent employers from effectively communicating with employees, and it should be thrown out.”

Allen Smith, manager of workplace law content for SHRM, reported back in mid-December that the SHRM Board had approved a proposal to join the lawsuit. Smith notes that this is only the third time SHRM has challenged a federal regulation in court.

I’ll keep you posted as to the developments in this action.

This was originally published on Eric B. Meyer’s blog, The Employer Handbook.

You know that scientist in the action movie who has all the right answers if only the government would just pay attention? Eric B. Meyer, Esq. gets companies HR-compliant before the action sequence. Serving clients nationwide, Eric is a Partner at FisherBroyles, LLP, which is the largest full-service, cloud-based law firm in the world, with approximately 210 attorneys in 21 offices nationwide. Eric is also a volunteer EEOC mediator, a paid private mediator, and publisher of The Employer Handbook (, which is pretty much the best employment law blog ever. That, and he's been quoted in the British tabloids. #Bucketlist.


11 Comments on “SHRM, U.S. Chamber Sue to Block NLRB “Quickie” Election Rules

  1. It’s great that these groups are fighting the NLRB. It’s bogus to have to join a union to work, let alone to have quickie elections so that no one knows anything about the union officials. I’ve worked in a union shop, and they generally did nothing for you. All they did was take your money, and to top it off, give it to some damn democrat to help in their election.

    1. Lewis – Was your pay above average, was your benefits bitter than what you were used to getting at other jobs, did you have work rules that had to be followed so you couldn’t be harassed or singled out for anything, how about work hours did you have overtime pay that was better than what the government mandates? These are just a few things that unions get their membership thru negotiations that YOU as an individual couldn’t get by yourself by kissing the companies ass.

  2. It is not about unions or no unions, it is about workers rights vs fascists, who believe they can convince citizens to attack others that have wages/benefits that they do not have…to promote division rather then solidarity…to divide and conquer…to coalesce wealth to the top,at the expense of anyone and everything civil in America. And I’m
    shocked that either Walker and Snyder managed to convince enough citizen to be
    re-elected. I will admit that the GOP and Fascist spin doctors have ordinary working folks voting against their own self interests, to my utter amazement and disbelief. If an individual does not want to work in a closed shop, where unions negotiate for the wages, benefits, work place conditions and/or deferred compensation due upon retirement, then that individual has the right and freedom NOT to work in that closed shop. No individual should be able to benefit from the costs of others. FYI, in each and every state where the “right to work for less” law was passed, the governors had to exempt Police from this legislation, because they would have no one to protect them from angry citizens and taxpayers.

  3. If you don’t want to be in a union go work where there is none, the only reason non union companies pay what they do is because of competition with union wages and benefits, if it weren’t for that they could and would pay you pennies.

  4. RTW states data show that there is some business growth but the increase in incomes only goes to business owners and workers wages actually go down, reducing consumer buying power. There is no solid data showing the RTW alone increased business/manufacturing in a state due to the difficulty in separating that from other factors (state policies favoring owners over worker, overseas relocation of plants, etc) which can affect manufacturing in a state. For instance, in 2001, Oklahoma passed a right-to-work law and soon saw its manufacturing base shrivel. But how much of that was due to the law and how much due to competition from China cannot be measured.

  5. I am a former union president. I think quick elections are very much in the union’s favor. The union has had months or years to get their message out to the potential members while the management has not until the election is authorized. I believe the waiting period should be at least three months.

  6. Come on Republican Congress, kill the nlrb permanently! It is socialist! It is not and has never been Constitutional!

    1. there are many departments that perform unconstitutional actions as only congress is allowed to make laws and there is no provision for deferring that to someone else. I think a better argument for defunding the NRLB is that they are not a non-biased entity and I’m fairly sure you could find some collusion with union. Look at what’s happening in California where farm employees voted out a union because they weren’t really being represented. The NRLB has basically put a stay on that, forcing the employees to continue paying dues.

      1. The NRLB promotes worker’s rights, established via court cases decided over many years…those are the laws and law I was referring to…it is our laws within a nation of laws. Legislators cannot legislate laws that are contrary to established law

  7. I’ll lay my bottom dollar that no-one in SHRM the Chamber and most of you posers of union hate have ever been thru an organizing drive for union membership let alone one that the company beats the employees up with lies, threats, firings and unfair labor practices. The wait for an election is way to long and I for one applaud the NLRB for shortening the wait time for the election. If the company can’t make their case in two weeks about how bad the union is for them then to bad for the company. Tell me all you anti-union people if the union is so bad for employees why does the company have to hire anti-union consultants for tens of thousands of dollars to keep the union out. Why can’t they just tell the employees how bad the union is and they can do better without third party representation? I’ll tell you why because the employees can expect to make gains in there work rules, pensions, vacation time, wages conditions of work, hours of work and many other things where there employment is concerned.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *