Skip to main content

The NLRB public website is scheduled to undergo routine maintenance from Friday, November 21, 2025, at 11:00 PM ET (8:00 PM PT) until Monday, November 24, 2025, at 6:00 AM ET. From Friday night at 11:00 pm ET through Saturday morning at about 9:00 am ET, E-Filing will not be available. From Saturday through Monday morning, the E-Filing applications (E-Filing, Online Charge and Petition, and My Account Portal) may be periodically unavailable. We apologize for any inconvenience.
The NLRB reopened from shutdown status on November 13, 2025. Due dates to file or serve most documents were tolled during the period of the shutdown, although due dates cannot be tolled for filing and service of unfair labor practice charges, applications for awards of fees and other expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, and certain representation petitions. For documents where tolling applies, the terms are that for each day on which the Agency’s offices were closed for all or any portion of the day, one day is added to the time for filing or service of the document. If the new due date falls on a weekend or holiday, the new due date will be moved to the next business day. For example, if the original due date was October 7, 2025 and the shutdown lasted 43 days, the revised due date is November 19, 2025. See chart for revised due dates.

Breadcrumb

  1. Home

News & Publications

Newspapers

Board adopts amendments to election case procedures

Office of Public Affairs

202-273-1991

publicinfo@nlrb.gov

www.nlrb.gov

The National Labor Relations Board has adopted a final rule amending its election case procedures to reduce unnecessary litigation and delays. The rule will be published in the Federal Register on Thursday, December 22, and is due to take effect on April 30, 2012.
The rule is primarily focused on procedures followed by the NLRB in the minority of cases in which parties can't agree on issues such as whether the employees covered by the election petition are an appropriate voting group. In such cases, the matter goes to a hearing in a regional office and the NLRB Regional Director decides the question and sets the election. 
Going forward, the regional hearings will be expressly limited to issues relevant to the question of whether an election should be conducted. The hearing officer will have the authority to limit testimony to relevant issues, and to decide whether or not to accept post-hearing briefs.
Also, all appeals of regional director decisions to the Board will be consolidated into a single post-election request for review. Parties can currently appeal regional director decisions to the Board at multiple stages in the process.
In addition, the rule makes all Board review of Regional Directors’ decisions discretionary, leaving more final decisions in the hands of career civil servants with long experience supervising elections.
Chairman Mark Gaston Pearce and Member Craig Becker voted in favor of the rule, which was prepared following a public meeting in late November. Member Brian Hayes dissented from the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and voted at the November 30 public meeting against proceeding with publication of a final rule.  The final rule provides the opportunity for publication of a separate dissenting statement prior to the effective date of the rule.
In recent years, only about 10 percent of NLRB election cases have gone through the hearing process. Such elections have been held on average 101 days after the election petition was filed with a regional office.
 “This rule is about giving all employees who have petitioned for an election the right to vote in a timely manner and without the impediment of needless litigation,” said Chairman Pearce.
The amendments to the election case procedures in the new rule were drawn from a more comprehensive proposal put forward by the Board in June. More than 65,000 comments were submitted following publication of the broader proposal in the Federal Register. In a discussion introducing the new rule, the Board majority explained that it was holding for further deliberation parts of that proposal that had generated the most debate while moving ahead with parts considered relatively “less controversial.”