loader
Page is loading...
Print Logo Logo
gavel money

The Price for Refusing to Bargain May Soon be Going Up for Employers


There’s a nuanced question coming out of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) proceedings right now that carries some big implications for any employer whose workforce is likely to organize. The question is: If an employer refuses to bargain with union representatives after a unionization election has been certified, what kind of remedies can the NLRB issue?

Current law under the 50-year-old NLRB decision Ex-Cell-O Corp. says that the board can only order an employer to start bargaining. But that could soon change. The current NLRB general counsel, Jennifer Abbruzzo, has pushed for greater protections for employees – and last month lawyers from her office filed a motion asking the NLRB to overturn Ex-Cell-O. They argue that instead of just ordering the employer to start bargaining (what’s known as prospective relief), the NLRB should recognize that it has the power to order compensatory relief.

In other words, compensatory relief means an employer refusing to bargain after a unionization election would have to pay employees for the “lost opportunity to bargain.” Figuring out the amount of compensation could be challenging and involve comparing the contracts of employees in similar situations.

Some employers refuse to bargain so they can get a federal court to review the union election process, which is overseen by the NLRB and its representatives. The employer might believe that the election wasn’t properly conducted or that the NLRB made an incorrect decision about which employees belong in a bargaining unit. Under the National Labor Relations Act, the only way a company can get a court to review the underlying NLRB representation proceedings is by refusing to bargain and drawing an unfair labor practice charge, as those charges are reviewable by the courts.

All of this is complicated. But it boils down to something pretty simple: the prospect of increased financial liability for employers. If the NLRB reverses Ex-Cell-O and holds that employers have to pay out for delayed bargaining, then an employer who wants to get in front of a judge may have to engage in a nuanced risk/reward calculation. This also follows the NLRB general counsel’s office of seeking to expand its remedial powers. Accordingly, this remains an important labor law issue for companies to watch.


RELATED ARTICLES

Reversing the Call: NLRB Seeks to Rescind 2020 Rule, Protect Union Status

November 8, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board

Do Smartwatches, GPS Devices, and Other Employee Tracking Technologies Violate Labor Law?

November 1, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board

Labor Board Issues Updated Guidance on Injunction Actions

October 31, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board

NLRB Rules Dues Checkoff Must Continue After Collective Bargaining Agreement Expires

October 7, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board, Unions and Union Membership

Mailing It In? Labor Board Signals Potential Return To Manual Elections

October 3, 2022 | Labor Relations, National Labor Relations Board, Unions and Union Membership

Subscribe

Do you want to receive more valuable insights directly in your inbox? Visit our subscription center and let us know what you're interested in learning more about.

View Subscription Center
RELATED TOPICS
Labor Relations
Labor Unions
union activity
NLRB
Trending Connect
We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to use cookies.