President Biden is calling for a 10% budget increase for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), with $2.1 million earmarked to launch a unionization marketing effort by the board. Beyond beefing up regional offices, Biden’s budget seeks to encourage the board to move beyond its stated mandate to adjudicate labor disputes and oversee union elections, and encourage workers to join unions.
On June 15th, the Department of Labor announced $1.5 million in grants available to the states to fund efforts to inform women about their rights to unionize. The grant recipients must be community-based organizations or non-profits that provide at least one of these services:
- Providing outreach to vulnerable, low-income and marginalized women workers.
- Disseminating educational materials through varied platforms, including social media, in-person or virtual events, brochures and leaflets, one-on-one consultations and other outreach.
- Assisting women workers with navigating and calculating benefits and connecting and referring women workers to additional services, benefits and/or legal assistance.
- Raising awareness of women’s rights to benefits and assistance in their own communities.
Mail ballot unionization elections have been fraught with issues, and the NLRB recently ruled on whether or not the solicitation of mail-ballots would be considered objectionable conduct that could set aside the election.
The Board found that solicitation of mail ballots does constitute objectionable conduct and may warrant setting aside an election in certain circumstances, but upheld the Regional Directors dismissal of employer objections in this recent case. The decision turned on the point of whether or not the ballot solicitation affected a determinative number of voters. Evidence relevant to determine whether setting aside an election is warranted include:
- the number of unit employees whose ballots were solicited;
- the number of unit employees who were aware of ballot solicitation; and
- whether a party engaged in a pattern or practice of solicitation.
The D.C. Circuit overruled the NLRB in a recent decision regarding protected employers’ expressions, in favor of the employer. In this dispute, a union had negotiated a paid leave plan that was different from the employer’s plan for non-union employees, and when confusion between a particular employee’s accumulated leave erupted, the manager made a few comments to the employee blaming the issue on the union. Because the manager’s statements contained no threat or promise of benefits, the court determined that the comments fell within the bounds of section 8(c) of the National Labor Relations Act which protect employer’s rights to express views, arguments and opinions.
Following recent trends, a Connecticut bill legalizing recreational marijuana imposes labor peace agreements and forces union labor for cannabis industry construction projects via project labor agreements. Cannabis retailers engaged in construction or renovation projects of $5 million or more could face penalties of $10,000 per day if in violation of the PLA requirement. Although non-unionized construction labor accounts for 87% of the construction labor force in Connecticut, the law would dictate to private enterprise the forced use of unionized labor.
