Days after a U.S. District Court judge for the D.C. Circuit suggested that the National Labor Relations Board postpone the effective date of its notice posting rule, the agency has agreed to do so. As announced in a press release, the Board:
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Tags: Labor-Management Relations, Agency Changes, Agency Happenings, Notice Posting Rule, NLRB
Read More
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Tags: Labor-Management Relations, Federal Contracts, Executive Order 13496, Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Labo, Agency Rulemaking, Uncategorized
Read More
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Tags: Labor-Management Relations, Federal Contracts, Agency Rulemaking, Executive Order 13494, Persuader Activity, Economy in Government Contracting, Uncategorized
Read More
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Tags: Labor-Management Relations, Agency Changes, Uncategorized, NLRB
As expected, the House of Representatives voted 238-186 in favor of a bill that would prevent the National Labor Relations Board from ordering an employer to close, relocate, or transfer its operations under any circumstances. The Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act (H.R. 2587), introduced on July 19 by Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC) and co-sponsored by Reps. John Kline (R-MN), Phil Roe (R-TN), Joe Wilson (R-SC), and Trey Gowdy (R-SC), would amend Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act by adding the following provision:
Provided further, That the Board shall have no power to order an employer (or seek an order against an employer) to restore or reinstate any work, product, production line, or equipment, to rescind any relocation, transfer, subcontracting, outsourcing, or other change regarding the location, entity, or persons who shall be engaged in production or other business operations, or to require any employer to make an initial or additional investment at a particular plant, facility, or location.
If enacted, the provisions of this bill would apply to any pending complaint before the Board.
While this measure has sufficient support in the House, it is unlikely to gain traction in the Senate, where Democrats maintain a slim majority. Nonetheless, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced a companion bill (S. 1523) in that chamber last week, although it is not expected to advance.
by Ilyse Schuman
Provided further, That the Board shall have no power to order an employer (or seek an order against an employer) to restore or reinstate any work, product, production line, or equipment, to rescind any relocation, transfer, subcontracting, outsourcing, or other change regarding the location, entity, or persons who shall be engaged in production or other business operations, or to require any employer to make an initial or additional investment at a particular plant, facility, or location.
If enacted, the provisions of this bill would apply to any pending complaint before the Board.
While this measure has sufficient support in the House, it is unlikely to gain traction in the Senate, where Democrats maintain a slim majority. Nonetheless, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) introduced a companion bill (S. 1523) in that chamber last week, although it is not expected to advance.
by Ilyse Schuman
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Tags: Labor-Management Relations, Protecting Jobs From Government Interference Act, Uncategorized