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This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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