Search Our Website:
On December 21, 2010, the National Labor Relations Board announced it is proposing a rule which will require all employers subject to the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) to post a notice advising employees of their rights under the statute. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will be published in the Federal Register on December 22, 2010, opening the proposed rule to a 60-day public comment period. The Board “believes that many employees protected by the NLRA are unaware of their rights under the statute,” and its intent is “to increase knowledge of the NLRA among employees, to better enable the exercise of rights under the statute, and to promote statutory compliance by employers and unions.”
Under the new rule, private-sector employers subject to the NLRA will be required to post the notice where other workplace notices are customarily posted. The rule will apply to most private-sector workplaces, with the exception of airline, railroad, and agricultural employers. The notice will include provisions stating employees have the right to act together to improve wages and working conditions, to form, join and assist a union, to bargain collectively with their employer, and to choose not to engage in any of these activities. It also provides examples of unlawful employer and union conduct as well as Board contact information.

The Board rejected voluntary compliance as the sole means of enforcement in favor of a combination of the following possible enforcement mechanisms: (1) finding the failure to post the required notices to be an unfair labor practice; (2) tolling the statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges against employers that fail to post the notices; (3) considering the willful failure to post the notices as evidence of unlawful motive in unfair labor practice cases; and (4) voluntary compliance. The dissenting board member believes that “the Board lacks the statutory authority to promulgate or enforce the type of rule which the petitions contemplated and which the proposed rule makes explicit.”