Earlier today, the U.S. Senate voted to confirm the nomination of Richard F. Griffin, Jr. as General Counsel of the NLRB. The General Counsel is responsible for the enforcement of the NLRA and supervises the regional offices of the NLRB in the investigation of unfair labor practice complaints and the conduct of union representation elections.
Mr. Griffin’s nomination for the General Counsel position came earlier this year after a compromise that broke the deadlock on President Obama’s nominees to the NLRB. Mr. Griffin had been recess appointed to the NLRB, and that appointment was later ruled unconstitutional by a court of appeals in Washington, D.C. In addition to his service as a member of the NLRB, he has also served as General Counsel of the International Union of Operating Engineers.
Republicans in the Senate had previously blocked a vote on the confirmation of Mr. Griffin. Thus, the Senate had to vote to invoke cloture (that is, to cut off debate) on the nomination in order to even bring the nomination to the floor for a vote. To do so, supporters of Mr. Griffin’s nomination needed 60 votes. The vote to invoke cloture drew the support of 62 senators, with seven Republican senators siding with all Senate Democrats and two Independents.
The confirmation vote, however, was along party lines. Fifty-five senators (all Democrats plus two Independents) voted in favor of the nomination. Forty-five senators (all Republican members except one, who did not vote) voted against the nomination. For those readers in Ohio with an interest, both Senator Brown (D) and Senator Portman (R) voted with their respective parties on both votes.
The confirmation of Mr. Griffin ends the final chapter in what has been an ongoing battle over the last few years over the direction, control, and even functioning of the NLRB. With a fully constituted NLRB, a Senate-confirmed General Counsel, and the partial government shutdown in the past (at least for now), labor professionals should expect to see the NLRB become more active not only in its case adjudication efforts, but also on the rulemaking front. If the past four years are any indicator, that will likely not bode well for employers.