NLRB supports unions without elections

The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) Cemex decision reaffirms that elections aren’t the only appropriate path for seeking union representation. With this muted assertion, the Board overturns 50 years of labor law, snubs the U.S. Supreme Court, and threatens to undermine whatever residual faith the general public had in unions. Without secret ballot elections, the credibility of unions—which are enjoying a rise in public appreciation if not membership—is likely to crumble. This consideration didn’t rein in the Board in its drive to expand its notion of industrial justice.

Bargaining orders commonplace?

At issue in Cemex was whether and under what conditions the NLRB could issue a bargaining order (e.g.,compel recognition of the union) based solely on the assertion by the union that it represented a majority of the workforce, usually represented by signed authorization cards.

Even entertaining such an outcome was radical. Since the Supreme Court’s 1969 ruling in NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co. and its 1974 decision in Linden Lumber Division, Summer & Co. v. NLRB, an employer was free to reject an assertion of union majority status and insist on an election. This was based, in part, on the belief that authorization cards are an unreliable gauge of workers’ sentiment because of the unregulated circumstances under which the cards may be collected.