NLRB Announces Three Proposed Rules, ULPs May No Longer Block an Election
On August 12, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued three proposed amendments to the rules on union representation elections. These three amendments, outlined below, would change the "blocking charge" policy, the voluntary recognition bar, and the rule on contractual representation clauses in the construction industry.
First up is the proposed amendment to the blocking charge policy. This amendment would change the current process—where the filing of an unfair labor practice (ULP) charge blocks a union election from proceeding— to a "vote and impound" process, where the election would proceed, but the votes would be impounded until after the resolution of the charge.
The second proposed amendment impacts the "voluntary recognition bar." Under this proposed amendment, it would no longer automatically prohibit challenges to a voluntarily recognized union for up to a year after recognition. Instead, the amendment would reinstitute a prior rule requiring a 45 day post-recognition period, during which workers could attempt to decertify the union or support a competing union's election petition.
Finally, there is the proposed amendment to contractual representation clauses in the construction industry. These changes would prevent a union and an employer from transitioning into a typical 9(a) relationship by using contract language to demonstrate majority support. Rather, quantifiable evidence would be required to show a union has majority support.
The 60 day comment period on these three amendments runs through mid-November, with the blocking charge policy expected to have the broadest impact. In announcing the amendments, the NLRB Chairman stressed that they were aimed at protecting an employee's freedom to choose, or refrain from choosing, union representation. The NLRB has been busy; stay tuned for what may come next.
Related Capabilities
Featured Insights

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

In The News
Jul 29, 2026
Hinshaw Authors Contribute Two Articles in Latest Edition of the CCFL Quarterly Report

Webinar
Jul 28, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie and Sabrina Janeiro Present on Legal AI Technology

In The News
Jul 27, 2026
Scott Seaman Discusses How the Insurance Industry Contributed to the 2026 FIFA World Cup

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Jul 27, 2026
Compliance Guidance for the New Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act (VDPOSA)

Healthcare Alert
Jul 24, 2026
Q&A: Right to Electronic Monitoring Extended to Illinois Assisted and Shared Living Facilities

Press Release
Jul 23, 2026
Insurance Partner Christophe Burusco Joins Hinshaw in Los Angeles

In The News
Jul 16, 2026
Jennifer Driscoll Anticipates Epic Battle Between “Titans of the Antitrust Bar”

