Open Shop Web Meeting Covers Preparing for “Quickie Election” Rule
During the May 18 web meeting of AGC of America’s Open Shop Committee, attorney Rick Samson of Ogletree Deakins provided a Quick Learn presentation on Preparing for the National Labor Relations Board’s New “Quickie Election” Rule. Click here to access an audio recording of the presentation, a copy of the presentation slides, and a supplementary handout originally distributed at AGC's Annual Convention. The web meeting also featured an update on legal developments by AGC Associate General Counsel Denise Gold.
As previously reported, the “quickie” or “ambush” election rule refers to new procedures that expedite the process for unions to represent a group of workers in a manner expected to make union organizing easier. The rule took effect on April 14 despite pending legal challenges. On June 1, a federal district court dismissed a challenge brought by Texas chapters of the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) and of the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB). The court found that the challengers failed to show that the rule, on its face, violates the law. ABC and NFIB have filed an appeal.
Meanwhile, a separate lawsuit brought by two AGC-supported employer organizations, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) and the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, and other interested parties is still pending in federal district court in the District of Columbia. In April, the case was consolidated with another case brought by construction company Baker DC and some of its employees. The day after the new rule went into effect, United Construction Workers Local Union No. 202, Metropolitan Regional Council of Carpenters, filed a petition to represent Baker DC’s carpenters and laborers. The company and several employees sued to challenge the legality of the rule. The consolidation of the cases should help the Chamber’s case, as it raises the gravity of the case from being only a facial challenge (like the ABC lawsuit, a challenge brought before the rule has been applied based on a claim that the rule is unlawful in all of its applications) to including an “as-applied” challenge (one brought after the rule has been applied based on a claim that the application causes harm to that particular plaintiff).
AGC will continue to keep a close eye on developments in this area.
Return to Top