The “recess” appointment issue concerning the National Labor Relations Board is coming to a head. Federal judges apparently aren’t as interested in hearing the NLRB appeal on “ambush” elections as they are in having the government agency answer why it’s still functioning with illegitimate so-called recess appointments.
“A three-judge panel from the D.C. Circuit Court ordered the board to file a written response defending President Barack Obama’s recess appointments,” reports Bill McMorris in the Washington Free Beacon.
Union bosses were reeling from the ruling, triggered by a petition from the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. NRTW expressed concern that since a federal court found the Obama Administration’s recess appointments to the NLRB unconstitutional, the Board shouldn’t have the right to continue deliberating on a major case filed by the Foundation on behalf of Rhode Island nurse Jeanette Geary.
In 2012, Geary objected to her union dues being used for political activity, but the NLRB has yet to rule on the issue. Understandably, the NRTW demands the NLRB justify its authority to rule on petitions when it’s missing a “valid quorum” on the Board.
As the Geary drama unfolds, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is also applying its ruling on Obama recess appointments to enforce a recent case on “ambush” elections.
“Since last May, the NLRB has had its ambush election rules ‘temporarily suspended’ when a U.S. District Court judge ruled the NLRB lacked a proper quorum when implementing its new rules,” says the Labor Union Report. “On Tuesday, in a one-page order, the Court of Appeals ordered that the case be removed from the calendar for oral arguments and held in abeyance.”