The union representing NLRB employees asked to meet with the agency’s general counsel and chairman this week over cost-cutting measures.
The request follows the passage of the omnibus bill, which retained funding for the agency at the same level as under the previous year’s continuing resolution. NLRB Professional Association President Karen Cook said cost-saving measures such as cutting the agency’s health unit and reorganizing regional offices can no longer be justified under the current funding.
“You have stated that each of these proposals was predicated on imminent budget cuts to the agency,” Cook wrote in a letter sent Friday. “Now, those cuts have not come to pass.”
The omnibus bill rejected a 9 percent cut to agency funding laid out in the White House budget in February. Robb invited Cook to meet with him last Tuesday about proposed changes to field operations and case processing after the union sent a letter on March 15 criticizing him for providing “multiple, inconsistent justifications” for the changes.
Cook said withdrawing the proposals would “restore some of the faith, unity, and sense of mission” in career employees at the NLRB.
“In all my years at the agency, I have not witnessed a time when the public servants who work here felt more disillusioned and more anxious about the work that they do and the way they are valued,” she wrote.
Things are getting political around the National Labor Relations Board. In this second of two reports via POLITICO, NLRB employees are upset with General Counsel Peter Robb and plan to conduct protests over proposed changes to the organizational structure. Robb will be speaking at the CUE Conference in April.
NLRB employees will protest a proposal by general counsel Peter Robb to overhaul the board’s regional office structure when he arrives in New York City tonight, Bloomberg Law reports.
Employees will distribute flyers warning the changes could lead to “taking decision-making authority away from local offices and centralizing decision in Washington,” as well as more case dismissals. Local unions representing NLRB employees at the Brooklyn, Manhattan and agency headquarters in Washington, D.C., are involved with the effort.
Robb floated plans on a phone call last month to add a bureaucratic layer above the regional directors that would go into effect “regardless of budgetary considerations,” according to a letter written by the NLRB regional director committee. But he claimed the changes were devised “entirely for budgetary reasons” at a Jan. 19 meeting of the American Bar Association, just eight days later.
NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb, who will speak at our upcoming Spring event in Tampa is considering changes to the board’s case processing aimed at shortening case times.
A Jan. 29 memo asked regional officials for comment on a list of proposed changes by Feb. 9.
Suggestions in the memo, which was first reported by Bloomberg, include reducing investigation times by two weeks and allowing only two days for charging parties to respond to inquiries before a regional office can drop an investigation.
The proposals might also undercut the power of regional directors by allowing for “team dismissals” of “non-merit cases” by an investigator and supervisor. Currently, regional directors have to sign off on dismissals.
Per LLAC attorney Clyde Jacob, note the requirement of a prima facie case for a charge to move forward, the limitation on investigative subpoenas, and the emphasis on settlement.