(1)
Rule Would Promote Union Rights
(AP)
December 21, 2010
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hNpmL4HLUEmuylizlD6AXl6zgzrA

WASHINGTON (AP) - Most private employers would have to
display posters informing workers about their right to
form a union under a proposed federal rule that is bound
to please unions and draw the ire of companies trying to
resist labor organizers.

The planned rule, announced Tuesday by the National
Labor Relations Board, would require businesses to post
notices in employee break rooms or other prominent
locations to explain a worker's rights to bargain
collectively, distribute union literature or engage in
other union activities without reprisal.

The move to issue a broad rule signals a more aggressive
posture by the labor board, which usually makes policy
on a case-by-case basis in individual labor-management
disputes.

It comes less than a year after President Barack Obama
made several recess appointments to give the board its
first Democratic majority in a decade. Obama's
appointments to the board were held up for months over
GOP concerns that one nominee - former AFL-CIO counsel
Craig Becker - would be too sympathetic to unions.

As unions struggle to pass pro-labor legislation in
Congress, leaders are increasingly looking to the labor
board and other federal agencies to help reverse what
they view as an increasingly hostile atmosphere for
organizing new members.

Unions are trying to reverse years of membership
declines in the private sector, where just 7.2 percent
of employees belong to a union.

In recent months, the labor board has expressed an
interest in allowing electronic voting for union
elections, a move that business groups fear could
compromise secret ballots. The board is also speeding up
its review of cases where employees are fired during
union organizing drives.

The rule would not take effect for at least 60 days,
during which the agency is taking comments.

In a statement, the board said it believes many
employees protected by the National Labor Relations Act
"are unaware of their rights" under the law. The notices
make clear that workers don't have to join a union and
outline other legal protections against union
intimidation or misconduct.

Similar posters are already required to be displayed in
the offices of government contractors and subcontractors
under a White House executive order that took effect in
June. The directive was one of the first executive
orders Obama signed shortly after taking office last
year.

Michael Lotito, a San Francisco labor attorney who
represents employers, said the notices could make it
appear that the government is sanctioning unions.

"It will stimulate interest and curiosity among
employees as to why this happened, which will prompt
them to make telephone calls to unions," Lotito said.

Michael Eastman, executive director of labor policy at
the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, questioned whether the
board even has the legal authority to issue the rule. If
it does go forward, he suggested the posters should be
more balanced for those who don't want to join unions.

The AFL-CIO did not immediately respond to a request for
comment.

(2)
Proposed NLRB Rule Requires Employers to Post Workers' 
Rights
by Mike Hall
AFL-CIO Blog
December 22, 2010
http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/12/22/proposed-nlrb-rule-requires-employers-to-post-workers-rights/

Most workers have seen notices about their right to a
minimum wage or safe workplace posted in the company
break room or elsewhere on the job. Employers are
required to post those notices by federal law.

But there is no requirement for employers to post any
sort of notice about workers' rights under the National
Labor Relations Act (NLRA), including the right to form
a union. Now, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
is proposing a rule that would require employers to post
such notices in the workplace.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka says the proposed rule
is "a common sense policy needed in today's workplace."

Every working person in America deserves to know his or
her rights. [The rule].ensures that workers' rights are
effectively communicated in the workplace. It is
necessary in the face of widespread misunderstanding
about the law and many workers' justified fear of
exercising their rights under it.

According to the proposed rule, published in the Federal
Register, the NLRB believes that

many employees protected by the NLRA are unaware of
their rights under the statute. The intended effects of
this action are to increase knowledge of the NLRA among
employees, to better enable the exercise of rights under
the statute, and to promote statutory compliance by
employers and unions.

Federal contractors must post such notices and the new
proposed rule mirrors that requirement. The NLRB says
notices would inform workers that they have

the right to act together to improve wages and working
conditions, to form, join and assist a union, to bargain
collectively with their employer, and to choose not to
do any of these activities. It provides examples of
unlawful employer and union conduct and instructs
employees how to contact the NLRB with questions or
complaints.

Says Trumka:

When workers know their rights, they can make the best
decisions for themselves and their families.

(3)
Facts at a Glance
National Labor Relations Board
Proposed Rule for Notification of Employee Rights
http://www.nlrb.gov/About_Us/news_room/Notice_for_Rulemaking/rulefactsheet7.pdf

Background:

On December 22, 2010, the Federal Register will publish
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would require
employers to notify employees of their rights under the
National Labor Relations Act by posting a notice.

The purpose of the proposed rule is "to increase
knowledge of the NLRA among employees, to better enable
the exercise of rights under the statute, and to promote
statutory compliance by employers and unions."

The proposed rule would apply only to private-sector
employers subject to the National Labor Relations Act,
which excludes agricultural, railroad and airline
employers.

The notice of rights would be provided at no charge at
NLRB regional offices or could be downloaded from the
Board's website. Translated versions would be available
for workplaces where a significant number of employees
are not proficient in English. Electronic distribution,
such as by email, posting on an intranet or an internet
site, would also be required if the employer customarily
communicates with its employees that way.

The notice would be similar in content and design to the
notice of NLRA rights that must be posted by federal
contractors under a recent Department of Labor rule.

Similar postings of workplace rights are currently
required under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Title VII
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination
in Employment Act, the Occupational Safety and Health
Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family
and Medical Leave Act, among other workplace laws.

Public Comment Invited:

Public comment is invited on all aspects of the proposed
rule and should be submitted within 60 days of
publication in the Federal Register.

Comments should be submitted either electronically to
www.regulations.gov, or by mail or hand-delivery to
Lester A. Heltzer, Executive Secretary, NLRB, 1099 14th
Street NW, Washington DC 20570.

Comments submitted after the deadline will be considered
only to the extent feasible.

Questions and Answers:

Does my company have to post the notice now?

No. The Board's notice-posting rule is a proposed rule.
The public will have an opportunity to comment on the
proposed rule, and the Board will carefully consider
those comments in crafting a final rule. No employer
would have to post a notice unless and until the Board
issues a final rule requiring a notice posting.

How will the Board enforce the rule?

Failure to post the notice would be treated as an unfair
labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act.
The Board investigates allegations of unfair labor
practices made by employees, unions, employers, or other
persons. It does not initiate enforcement action on its
own.

Could an employer be fined for failing to post the
proposed notice?

No employer could be fined for failing to post the
notice.

What would be the consequences for failing to post the
notice?

The Board expects that most employers that fail to post
the notice would do so because they were unaware of the
rule, and would comply when requested by a Board agent.
In that event, the unfair labor practice case normally
would be closed without further action. The Board also
could extend the 6-month statute of limitations for
filing a charge involving other unfair labor practice
allegations against the employer. Finally, if an
employer knowingly fails to post the notice, the failure
could be considered as evidence of unlawful motive in an
unfair labor practice case involving other alleged
violations of the NLRA.

There is no union in my workplace; would the notice
still have to be posted?

Yes. All employers subject to the Board's jurisdiction
would be required to post the notice.

I am a Federal contractor. Would I have to post the
notice?

The Board's notice posting rule would apply to Federal
contractors. However, the Department of Labor already
requires Federal contractors to post an almost identical
notice of employee rights. A contractor would comply
with the Board's notice posting rule by posting the
Department of Labor's notice.

How would I get the notice?

The Board would provide copies of the notice on request
at no cost to the employer. These could be obtained by
contacting the NLRB at its headquarters or its regional,
sub-regional, or resident offices. Employers could also
download the notice from the Board's website and print
it out.

I communicate with my employees electronically, through
the Internet or by email. Would I still have to post the
notice?

Yes. The rule would require every covered employer to
post the notice electronically if that is the customary
means of communicating with employees, in addition to a
physical posting. The wording to be used in the email,
web page or link is specified in the proposed rule.

Many of my employees speak Spanish, and don't understand
English very well. Would I still have to post the
notice?

Yes. If a significant portion of employees are not
proficient in English, the employer must post the notice
in the language the employees speak. The Board would
provide translations of the notice, and of the required
link to the Board's website, in the appropriate
languages.

I operate a small business. Would I have to post the
Board's proposed notice?

The proposed rule applies to all employers subject to
the Board's jurisdiction. The Board has chosen not to
assert its jurisdiction over very small employers whose
annual volume of business is not large enough to have a
more than a slight effect on interstate commerce. The
jurisdictional standards are summarized in the proposed
rule and are explained in greater detail here.

Would I have to maintain records or submit reports under
the Board's rule?

No. There would be no record-keeping or reporting
requirements.

___________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest to people
on the left that will help them to interpret the world
and to change it.

Submit via email: [log in to unmask]

Submit via the Web: http://portside.org/submittous3

Frequently asked questions: http://portside.org/faq

Sub/Unsub: http://portside.org/subscribe-and-unsubscribe

Search Portside archives: http://portside.org/archive

Contribute to Portside: https://portside.org/donate