NLRB Election Rules

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for the gift of time. There is nothing that is a greater gift than that.

Of course, I would like everyone to vote for my resolution of disapproval. This did not go through a process that was open and transparent. In fact, there was only one person who voted for this who was confirmed by the Senate. There were two people who voted for it. The other one lost, in a bipartisan way, the ability to be on that committee, so he was recess-appointed. So one person confirmed by the Senate is making this rule, and there was also one person confirmed by the Senate who was against it. So it was a 1-to-1 tie. That would normally defeat anything.

The biggest thing that is being taken away in this, the biggest thing that collapsed the time down to a potential 10 days, the biggest thing is eliminating the preelection hearing. That is when the employees--the employees--get their fairness of finding out exactly who is going to be represented, who is going to be part of their unit, and get any of their questions answered about this organization that is about to receive their dues. It seems like the employees, for fairness, ought to have that right. It also ought to be for the employers to have that right, especially small businesspeople to have the time to get it together so they are not violating any of the National Labor Relations Board's rules that they can easily step into and be in big trouble during one of these elections.

I urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution of disapproval and stop the National Labor Relations Board's ambush election rule. This vote will send a message to the National Labor Relations Board that their job is not to stack the odds in favor of one party or another--under this administration or another--but to fairly resolve disputes and conduct secret ballot elections.

We have heard from several speakers on the other side of the aisle that this debate and vote are a waste of time. Debating the merits of this regulation is not a waste of time for the millions of small businesspeople and millions of employees who are going to be negatively impacted by it.

In fact, once it goes into effect next week, I believe all of us will be hearing from unhappy constituents and asked what we did to stop this legislation, and we will be asked. The contention that we should not be able to raise concerns about the National Labor Relations Board's ambush election regulation before it goes into effect sounds a lot like what the National Labor Relations Board is trying to do to small businesses and employees who have questions about a certification election.

This regulation will take away the right to question whether the appropriate employees are in the bargaining unit or whether it includes supervisors and managers who should not be in the union or whether it leaves out a group of employees who should be in the union because they have similar jobs, and if they are excluded, they will lose ground against the newly unionized employees. This regulation takes away the right to present evidence and testimony at a preelection hearing and to file briefs supporting a position.

Because of the Congressional Review Act, we Senators have had the opportunity to present evidence and have debate. That is a privilege the NLRB is taking away from many small employers and employees, and that will lead to some suffering of the employees.

I urge my colleagues to vote for the motion to proceed to S.J. Res. 36. Again, it is a congressional privilege and we should take advantage of it. It is a chance to send a message that we want all of our boards to be fair and equal.

I yield back any remaining time.

Source