This is an official notice of the National Council of Investigation & Security Services representing the investigative and security professions for 39 years

 

Capitol
NCISS 
Legislative ALERT
April 7, 2014
 

  NCISS Sends Comments to National Labor Relations Board on "Ambush Election" Proposed Rule

 

Just in from NCISS Legislative Advocates at


  

 

On Friday, April 4, NCISS submitted a 12 page comment on the proposed "Ambush" rule to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), detailing its objections to the measure, which would unfairly shorten the time management has to respond to a petition to unionize an employer's workforce.

 

NLRB's propose rule includes the following provisions: 

  • Permitting electronic filing of election petitions, and potentially electronic showing of interest (in other words, dispensing with employee signatures on union cards);
  • Requiring pre-election hearings be held in as few as seven days of the union filing the petition for election;
  • Requiring employers draft a "Statement of Position" to be presented at that hearing, which sets forth their position on all relevant legal issues while waiving forever any issue that is not addressed in the Statement;
  • Limiting the issues that may be litigated prior to an election, such as determining which employees are eligible to vote, including whether certain employees qualify as supervisors;
  • Requiring employers provide union organizers with names, home addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, work locations, shifts and job classifications of all employees eligible to vote; and
  • Eliminating pre-election Board review of a Regional Director's decision.

NCISS cited numerous, specific weaknesses in the proposed rule, including the fact that it would fundamentally unbalance the process, deprive employers of a fair chance to make their case, and ultimately deny employees a full airing of the costs and benefits of unionization.

 

NCISS's full comment is in the letter below...  

 

April 2, 2014

 

Via Electronic Submission: http://www.regulations.gov

 

Mr. Gary Shinners

Executive Secretary

National Labor Relations Board

1099 14th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20570

 

Re:      Representation-Case Procedures; RIN 3142-AA08 (Docket No. NLRB-2011-0002)

           

Dear Mr. Shinners:

 

The National Council of Investigative and Security Services (NCISS) hereby submits these comments to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) in response to the above-referenced notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published in the Federal Register on February 6, 2014 at 79 Federal Register 7318.

 

NCISS is a trade association representing private investigators and security service companies from across the United States.  NCISS is comprised 1000 members, 200 of which are security service providers.  Together, these security service companies employ approximately 90,000 professionals and generate approximately $2.5 billion in economic activity per annum.

 

As an association of security companies of modest size, employee/management relations are a primary concern to us, and a huge factor in our Members' success or failure.  Our Members endeavor to work as collaboratively as possible with our employees, and we do our utmost to ensure that our workplaces preserve an atmosphere of open and honest communication and negotiation.  We fear, however that the current proposed rule would upset this balance, allowing unrepresentative groups and individuals to promote employee activity that, while undertaken in the name of benefitting employees, would not allow sufficient time and/or process for a full airing of both costs and benefits. 

 

Moreover, we fear, inter alia, that disclosure requirements of employee contact information raises the alarming prospects of unwanted intrusions, potential security breaches, and almost certainly personal harassment.  In a time when data collection and data privacy are major concerns of Congress and the Administration, it seems counter-intuitive that the government would force the release of what could be construed as sensitive personal information. 

 

Ultimately, however, we are most concerned that a precipitous decision undertaken via the avenues provided by this proposed rule could prove ruinous to the business itself - a perverse and ridiculous result from a process ostensibly designed to benefit employees.

 

We thank you for your consideration of NCISS's comments.

 

Comments in Response to the NLRB's Proposed Rule

 

On June 22, 2011, the NLRB issued a proposed rule that would have made substantial, unnecessary and harmful changes to its long-standing union representation election procedures.  Specifically, the Board proposed: 

  • Permitting electronic filing of election petitions, and potentially electronic showing of interest (in other words, dispensing with employee signatures on union cards);
  • Requiring pre-election hearings be held in as few as seven days of the union filing the petition for election;
  • Requiring employers draft a "Statement of Position" to be presented at that hearing, which sets forth their position on all relevant legal issues while waiving forever any issue that is not addressed in the Statement;
  • Limiting the issues that may be litigated prior to an election, such as determining which employees are eligible to vote, including whether certain employees qualify as supervisors;
  • Requiring employers provide union organizers with names, home addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, work locations, shifts and job classifications of all employees eligible to vote; and
  • Eliminating pre-election Board review of a Regional Director's decision. 

After receiving over 65,000 comments on the proposal, on December 22, 2011 the Board issued its final regulation.  This rule was later vacated, however, because its passage was found to be procedurally flawed. 

 

The NLRB eventually withdrew the 2011 rule, but on February 6, 2014 issued a new NPRM identical to its June 2011 proposal.  The passage of time has not remedied the rule's deep flaws.   The NLRB still fails to provide reasonable justification for the changes, the net effect of which would be to substantially reduce the time between a union's filing of a petition for election with the Board and the election itself. - - - read more...

  

~~~~~~~~~

 

As always, we will keep you posted as the process develops. If you have questions, please contact me at the email provided with my signature line.

 

 

Maria Landry

 

Maria Landry

 [email protected] 
NCISS Legislative Chair - Security

7501 Sparrows Point Boulevard

Baltimore, Maryland 21219-1927

T-(800) 445-8408  F-(410) 388-9746

www.nciss.org

  

 (Permission granted to repost this message)

Want to add your voice to the efforts to address restrictive legislation and protect your profession? 
Go to www,nciss,org for membership information. Check out other links on the web site as well. 

NCISS: Your Voice In the Nation's Capital !

NCISS Logo