As we’ve previously reported, on April 14, 2015, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) implemented new union election rules (Election Rules), which made significant changes to the Board’s procedures for processing election petitions, holding hearings, and conducting secret-ballot elections. Most significantly, the Election Rules paved the way for union elections to be held in as few as 14–21 days after the filing of a union petition, a dramatic decrease from the current median time of 38 days.

As predicted, since the Election Rules went into effect, the median time between the filing of a union petition and the election has decreased dramatically. Prior to the implementation of the Election Rules, union elections were typically held approximately six (6) weeks after the petition was filed (and sometimes longer if the parties litigated contested issues before the Region). According to recent data, the median time for elections held in the three months following the implementation of the Election Rules was just 23 days. And, the number of petitions filed rose sharply, increasing by 32 percent in the first month after the Election Rules took effect.

Continue Reading.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Justin F. Keith Justin F. Keith

Justin helps unionized businesses maintain successful labor relations and helps non-union companies maintain direct relationships with their employees through education, training, and proactive union awareness. His labor practice encompasses all aspects of labor relations, including unfair labor practices, representation proceedings before the National

Justin helps unionized businesses maintain successful labor relations and helps non-union companies maintain direct relationships with their employees through education, training, and proactive union awareness. His labor practice encompasses all aspects of labor relations, including unfair labor practices, representation proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board and Courts of Appeal, contract negotiations, strikes and lockouts, grievances, and arbitrations. Justin also represents employers in all areas of employment law—including reductions in force, litigation of discrimination, harassment, whistleblower, and retaliation claims, and numerous other personnel and workplace issues—before state and federal agencies and in courts throughout the country.

Justin Co-Chairs the firm’s Labor & Employment Practice’s Labor-Management Relations group and advises clients in all areas of traditional labor law, including union organizing campaigns, collective bargaining negotiations, unfair labor practice charges and representation case proceedings before the NLRB, union awareness strategy and training, strike response and contingency planning, grievance arbitration proceedings, and appellate litigation before the NLRB and the Courts of Appeals. Justin was co-counsel to New Process Steel in the landmark Supreme Court case, New Process Steel v. NLRB, 560 U.S. 674 (2010). He is also a contributing editor of The Developing Labor Law, the leading treatise on U.S. labor law, and a frequent speaker to legal and industry groups on labor and employment issues.

Justin has litigated dozens of wage and hour class actions brought under the Massachusetts Wage Act and nationwide collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act. He represents employers across a broad spectrum of industries, including retail, transportation, delivery services, and telecom services in nationwide class and collective actions brought throughout the country.

Justin regularly provides counsel to senior management and human resource personnel on employment law compliance matters, such as reductions in force, leaves of absence, exempt status classification under the FLSA and state law, employee discipline, sexual