On the recordApril 24, 2012
today I would like to discuss my strong opposition to the resolution before us, the resolution disapproving of the National Labor Relations Board's final rule governing election procedures. This rule seeks to modernize and streamline a process that is currently costly, inefficient, and promotes unnecessary delay. Let's be clear about what the rule does and does not actually do. This rule does not fundamentally change how workers are permitted to organize. This rule does not prevent employers from talking to their workers about unionization. This rule is not the Employee Free Choice Act by fiat. This rule does not require that an election take place in a set number of days. These are all of the claims that have been levied against this rule, and, factually, none of them are true. The rule's modifications are purely procedural. Here is one example. Under the current rules, companies often spend weeks litigating the eligibility of a handful of workers even though the election is ultimately decided by 50 or 100 votes. Those disputed votes couldn't have determined the outcome of the election--the only consequence was delay. So under the new rules, disputes about small numbers of voter eligibility can be decided after the election. The workers in question can cast provisional ballots, just as they do in political elections. These exact circumstances played out in Minnesota.…
