NLRB issues three decisions, two of which overturn Bush-era decisions

[ProSense]

NLRB issues three decisions, two of which overturn Bush-era decisions

by Laura Clawson

<...>

The NLRB has issued three more rulings following last week's announcement that employers would be required to notify workers of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Two of Tuesday's rulings overturn Bush-era NLRB rulings, both having to do with union decertifications.

The Lamons Gasket decision reestablishes a waiting period between when workers vote to join a union and when a decertification challenge to that union can occur:

For over forty years, federal law had barred challenges to a union’s representative status for a "reasonable period" following voluntary recognition, in order to give the new bargaining relationship a chance to succeed. In its 2007 decision in Dana Corp., the Board allowed for an immediate challenge to the union’s status by 30% of employees or a rival union. Today’s decision in Lamons Gasket returns the Board to the law as it existed before Dana Corp.

Similarly, the Bush NLRB had ruled in 2002 that if a company came under new ownership, a preexisting union could be immediately challenged by the new owner, 30 percent of employees, or a rival union. Tuesday's UGL-UNICCO Service Company ruling reestablishes a reasonable waiting period in which the union is protected from challenge.

A third decision actually reaches back to the George H.W. Bush era, when the NLRB had created a "special test for bargaining unit determinations in nursing homes, rehabilitation centers, and other non-acute health care facilities." In the Specialty Healthcare case decided Tuesday, a nursing home owner had applied this special test, arguing that the home's Certified Nursing Assistants (CNAs) could not unionize by themselves but had to be joined by the home's cooks, dietary aides, data entry clerk and other non-CNA support staff. The NLRB overturned that special standard, and "Employees at such facilities will now be subject to the same 'community-of-interest' standard that the Board has traditionally applied at other workplaces."

more

[ProSense]

1. No comment? n/t

[paulk]

2. why did this take almost three years?

Not blaming Obama admin, it's a serious question.

[vaberella]

3. Redtape and a whole new investigation.

Shit takes time. I'm glad it's done. It's a good thing.

[MilesColtrane]

9. Obama's appointees to the NLRB weren't confirmed by the Senate until...

June of last year.

So, really this has taken 14 months, not three years.

[pnorman]

4. I'm happy with it!

Incremental successes are all that a President facing what Obama has faced, since he took office can pull off. Want better? Give him in 2012, the sort of power that LBJ had in 1964

[Fearless]

15. Yay outsourcing!1!

[JoeyT]

5. K&R

All good news.

[ProSense]

6. Yes, it is. n/t

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

7. Thank you for posting.

What do Obama's critics who say he's no different than GW have ot say about his?

[FrenchieCat]

8. They will say...."Let it sink" and

Let's unrec this so we can discourage those who have the audacity of not wanting Republicans in power of all three branches of government to continue posting facts.

[TheWraith]

13. Unfortunately true.

Funny how the bashers never, EVER comment unless they can spin it into some kind of anti-Obama tripe.

[Kingofalldems]

10. Kick this one to the top

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

11. Kick

:kick:

[Tx4obama]

12. Kick! n/t

[Greybnk48]

14. K&R! Thank you Obama administration!! n/t

[great white snark]

16. Kick

Is this just a crumb?

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

17. One good kick deserves another.

:kick:

[ellie]

18. Kicking

I love the howls from the haters.