Cheat Sheet: A guide to the NLRB recess appointment controversy
President Barack Obamas first term saw a spate of pro-labor rulings emerging from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which included three Democratic members with links to unions.
June 18, 2013 at 04:00 AM
19 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
President Barack Obama's first term saw a spate of pro-labor rulings emerging from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which included three Democratic members with links to unions. The board's rulings, including regulations covering social media, union elections and right-to-work issues, worried employers and Republican legislators alike.
But that string of decisions came to a halt earlier this year when the NLRB became embroiled in a controversy over recess appointments that threatens to undo many of the board's rulings going back more than a year. InsideCounsel's June cover story takes a look at the NLRB in limbo, and howpoliticians, employers and attorneys are responding to the uncertainty surrounding the board.
What caused the current uncertainty surrounding the NLRB?
In January, the D.C. Circuit ruled in Noel Canning v. NLRB that President Barack Obama's appointments of Sharon Block, Richard Griffin and Terence Flynn to the NLRB were unconstitutional because they were made while the Senate was in recess. The decision, if it stands, could invalidate the board's decisions and rulemaking stretching back to at least January 2012—when Obama made the appointments—because the five-member board would not have had the quorum necessary to make decisions. On June 24, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case during its fall term.
Then on May 16, the 3rd Circuit found the appointment of former NLRB member Craig Becker invalid for the same reason. Becker was selected by Obama to serve a “recess” appointment on the board from March 27, 2010 until early in 2012. This court decision casts doubt on the legitimacy of many additional board rulings.
What NLRB decisions could be invalidated if the two appeals court rulings stand?
Among the more significant decisions to be thrown into jeopardy is D.R. Horton Inc.—currently on appeal before the 5th Circuit—which struck down class action waivers in arbitration agreements. Another is the so-called “quickie election rule,” which shortens the time frame for union representation elections from 56 days to 30 days.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
5 minute readIn-House Lawyers Are Focused on Employment and Cybersecurity Disputes, But Looking Out for Conflict Over AI
Trending Stories
- 1Blockchain’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment Privacy Paradoxes
- 2Prior Written Notice: Calabrese v. City of Albany
- 3Learning From Experience: The Best and Worst of Years Past
- 4Treasury GC Returns to Davis Polk to Co-Chair White-Collar Defense and Investigations Practice
- 5Decision of the Day: JFK to Paris Stowaway's Bail Revocation Explained
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250