By Wayne Risher
Originally published 05:17 p.m., November 30, 2011
Updated 09:45 p.m., November 30, 2011
A move to loosen union election rules drew mixed reaction from Memphis labor lawyers Wednesday.
The National Labor Relations Board, meeting in Washington, pushed ahead with rule changes designed to speed up elections. Two Democrats prevailed over the lone Republican in adopting a resolution that sets up final action before Jan. 1.
In Memphis, pro-business lawyer Arnold Perl panned the rule change as hasty and potentially bad for Tennessee employers, while pro-labor lawyer Sam Morris said it would merely level the playing field for workers.
"It does not confer an immediate advantage" for labor, Morris said. "All it does is take away an employer tool for delay."
Perl echoed the sentiments of Brian Hayes, the NLRB's GOP board member, who said it wasn't fair for two-fifths of the board to order a change of such magnitude.
The board is supposed to have five members, but congressional Republicans have blocked President Barack Obama from filling vacancies. It will be down to two members, less than a voting quorum, after one of the Democrats goes out of office Dec. 31.
Perl said the proposed rule is better than what was proposed in June, but still a step backward.
Hayes, who rejected the idea of resigning his post to stop Wednesday's board action, said, "My view remains this is a fundamentally flawed rule and is a result of a fundamentally flawed process."
Perl was the opening witness, representing the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce and Industry, during two days of hearings last summer.
The lawyer with Glankler Brown said, "In the board's haste to implement these changes, it provides a shorter time for employers to address employees and for employees to learn all the facts for an informed decision."
The change would hit Tennessee hard because it is a right-to-work state with 2.2 percent union membership in the private sector.
Morris, with Godwin Morris Laurenzi Bloomfield, said the major change would prevent employers from appealing technical issues before an election can be held.
"Let's face it, the chamber of commerce does not want any union elections, let alone prompt and fair ones," Morris said. "So taking away a tool employers have to impede the process and sidetrack it is obviously seen as a travesty by those simply opposed to unionism."
-- Wayne Risher: (901) 529-2874
