Showing posts with label New Process Steel. Show all posts
NLRD issues satement on New Process Steel effect
The NLRB has issued a press release about what it expects to do with the cases affected by the New Process Steel decision.
New (statutory interpretation) Process
We've just had a quick read of the New Process Steel opinion. Essentially the 5 member majority (Stevens, Roberts, Scalia, Alito, Thomas) reason through the language of §3(b) of the NLRA to conclude the authority of a 3 member delegation of the NLRB ceases to exist when the term of one member of the three expires. I must admit the dissent written by Justice Kennedy (and joined by Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor) makes more sense. The statutory interpretation opinion is less significant that the open questions concerning the 600+ cases decided by the two member NLRB. The NLRB has issued a press release concerning the 5 cases pending before the Supreme Court and the 69 cases pending before the Courts of Appeals. Likely these cases will be remanded to the NLRB.
In New Process, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded. Likely the Court of Appeals will vacate the NLRB decision and remand to the NLRB. (We think this is the likely result in all the pending cases.) But what about the cases that are final? Are the decisions null due to an absence of proper delegation? Or are they final judgments not subject to collateral attack? Would the NLRB entertain a motion to reconsider the final cases. likely not in the later instance since the cases decided were sufficiently non controversial for the two remaining members, one a democrat and the other a republican, to agree on a result. Could the now properly populated Board globally reaffirm the entirety of the two-member decisions? And also what becomes of the other delegations? The majority opinion notes without comment that "the Board delegated to the general counsel continuing authority to initiate and conduct litigation that would normally require case-by-case approval of the Board." Is the general counsel's authority to act defective, and what effect would that have on pending and decided cases.
New Process Steel decided
Hot off the presses (what and odd anachronism), the Supreme Court has rejected the Board's authority to issue 2-member decisions. New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, No. 08–1457. Argued March 23, 2010—Decided June 17, 2010. I wont have time until later to digest the opinion by Justice Stevens, but the 5-4 decision does create a backlog of now undecided cases. More about this later.
Two Member NLRB decisions
SCOTUSBLOG reports on Friday the Supreme Court directed the parties to file simultaneous letter briefs in response to Solicitor General Elena Kagan's informing the Court that President Obama had made two recess appointments to the NLRB. Its unclear what this is about. Is the Court inviting the NLRB to cure any problem with 2 member decisions? This invitation would be expected if there was a perceived reason that the Court should not hear the case on the merits. Maybe its just a formal invitation to respond as to the possible effects, without signaling a perception of anything. Approximately 600 Board decisions have been rendered when the NLRB had only 2 members. The case is New Process Steel v. NLRB (docket 08-1457).
New Process Steel analysis
Scotusblog has a good post on the Parties arguments in the 2 Member NLRB case set for oral argument on March 23.
SCOTUS sets 2 member NLRB argument
The Supreme Court set oral argument in New Process Steel for March 23. The case involves the validity of 2 member decisions by the NLRB. If as reported by the New York Times, President Obama intends to renominate Craig Becker to the NLRB, ensuring further delay in filling the 3 Board vacancies, the case before SCOTUS may affect an increasing number of decisions that will be decided by a two member NLRB.
VIP Followers
Info recommended by:
Webpages of law
Popular entries
-
500 Coke employees lost their health insurance the day after they went on strike. The union has sued under ERISA , claiming the action wa...
-
Two weeks ago, a Florida man was arrested for logging on to his Facebook account and requesting that his estranged wife list him as a "...
-
The average cost of family health insurance coverage rose 3% to $13,770 in 2010, while at the same time the employee's share of the c...
-
UPDATE: There is pending legislation for major changes to the alimony statute in Massachusetts. The Alimony Reform Act of 2011 was filed on...
-
There are four house bills that propose changes to the current custody statute. However, H.1306 and H.2684 are practically the same, though...
-
Image courtesy of FreeFoto.com This is the first post in our series evaluating the potential of Custody Reform in Massachusetts. Before you...
-
The second senate bill that proposes amendments to the current custody statute is S00847. This proposal was filed in the Senate on January ...
-
Well kids I plan to scoot out of here shortly, to begin my long solemn weekend regimen of prayer , reflection , and expanding my abdomen , s...
-
(BY HUGO) A report from MARSH Canada, A Review of Water-Related Opportunities and Threats , outlines insurance issues in the sector to ensur...
-
There are two ways to ask this question: Can I start dating while my divorce case is pending? and Should I start dating while my divorce cas...