NLRB's "POSTER RULE" Dead

Russ Samson Iowa Employment and Labor Law Dickinson Law Firm Des Moines Iowa

Posted on 01/09/2014 at 10:00 AM by Russell Samson

On Monday, January 6, 2014, the NLRB issued a statement to the effect that it would not be seeking review by the United States Supreme Court of the two U.S. Court of Appeals decisions invalidating its Notice Posting Rule. This apparently brings to an end an attempt on the part of this agency to require employers to post something that Congress had not so required over more than seven decades. On August 30, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board published in the Federal Register a “final rule” which required employers subject to the agency’s jurisdiction to post (physically at their workplaces as well as on the employer’s web sites) a poster, “Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act.” A failure of an employer to do so would, under the final rule, be an unfair labor practice, as well as subjecting the employer to other sanctions. The “final rule” was to be effective November 14, 2011. The NLRB itself pushed the effective date out to January 31, 2012, reportedly due to employer confusion over who was subject to the posting requirement. In December 2012, the NRLB delayed the rule yet again, to April 30, 2012, reportedly at the request of a federal court which was hearing a challenge to the rule. Following that court’s decision which questioned the rule and an appeal to the United States District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, that court stayed the effectiveness of the rule until it ruled on the appeal. In the meantime, a federal court in South Carolina – in a separate case – also struck down the rule. The NLRB appealed that decision to the Fourth Circuit. On May 7, 2013, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down the rule, without dissent. While a different panel of that court had earlier determined the (in)validity of certain recess appointments to the NLRB, the May 2013 opinion did not rest upon the status of the individuals who had voted to adopt the rule. Rather it looked at the substance of the rule itself. On June 14, 2013, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit unanimously struck down the rule “on the merits” as well. The Fourth Circuit’s opinion did not look at the constitutional issues raised by the D.C. Circuit’s opinion. Rather it focused on the nature of the NLRB itself, calling it a "reactive entity." As is true of virtually all appellate courts in this country, the United States Supreme Court has time limits within which a party seeking to appeal to that Court must act – after which no appeal is generally permitted. By my (admittedly fallible) count, the time for the NLRB to appeal the decisions striking down its “poster” rule ran out on January 2, 2014. So the NLRB’s statement of January 6, 2014, to the effect that it would not be seeking Supreme Court review of the two U.S. Court of Appeals decisions invalidating its Notice Posting Rule didn’t appear (to me) to be too newsworthy. But it did provide an opportunity for the agency to remind that: “The workplace poster remains available on the NLRB website. It may be viewed, displayed and disseminated voluntarily.” Or not.  

The material in this blog is not intended, nor should it be construed or relied upon, as legal advice. Please consult with an attorney if specific legal information is needed.

- Russ Samson

 

Questions, Contact us today.

 


The material, whether written or oral (including videos) that is posted on the various blogs of Dickinson Law is not intended, nor should it be construed or relied upon, as legal advice. The opinions expressed in the various blog posting are those of the individual author, they may not reflect the opinions of the firm.  Your use of the Dickinson Law blog postings does NOT create an attorney-client relationship between you and Dickinson, Mackaman, Tyler & Hagen, P.C. or any of its attorneys.  If specific legal information is needed, please retain and consult with an attorney of your own selection.

Comments
There are no comments yet.
Add Comment

* Indicates a required field