National Labor Relations Board v. Enterprise Leasing Co. Southeast, LLC

722 F.3d 609 (4th Cir. 2013) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · July 17, 2013 · No. Nos. 12-1514, 12-2000, 12-2065

Summary

The Fourth Circuit considered consolidated challenges involving the National Labor Relations Board's orders requiring Enterprise Leasing and Huntington Ingalls to bargain with certified unions. The court held that the President's January 4, 2012 recess appointments to the NLRB were constitutionally invalid because they were not made during a Senate recess, leaving the Board without a quorum when it issued the relevant decisions. The court therefore denied enforcement of the Board's orders.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Hamilton, Senior Circuit Judge; Duncan, Circuit Judge; Diaz, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
July 17, 2013
Docket number
Nos. 12-1514, 12-2000, 12-2065
Procedural posture
Enterprise Leasing sought review of, and the National Labor Relations Board sought enforcement of, an NLRB order finding that Enterprise unlawfully refused to bargain with a certified union. Huntington Ingalls petitioned for review of, and the Board cross-applied for enforcement of, a separate NLRB order finding that Huntington unlawfully refused to bargain. The consolidated appeals also challenged the constitutional validity of the President's January 4, 2012 recess appointments to the NLRB.
Standard of review
The court reviewed the Board's election decision for clear abuse of discretion, factual findings for substantial evidence, bargaining-unit determinations for abuse of discretion and substantial evidence, and the constitutional validity of the recess appointments de novo.
Precedential value
published precedential opinion
Parties
Enterprise Leasing Company Southeast, LLC, Huntington Ingalls Incorporated v. National Labor Relations Board
Disposition
enforcement denied

Topics

unfair labor practicescollective bargaininglabor lawconstitutional lawappellate procedure

Practice areas

labor lawadministrative lawconstitutional lawappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Board abused its discretion or lacked substantial evidence in refusing to set aside Enterprise's representation election based on an unauthorized employee photograph.
  2. Whether the Board abused its discretion or lacked substantial evidence in refusing to set aside Enterprise's election because of inclement weather.
  3. Whether the union organizer's statement that an employee should not burn bridges constituted objectionable coercive conduct requiring the election to be set aside.
  4. Whether the Board's determination that Huntington's E85 RADCON technical employees constituted an appropriate separate bargaining unit was supported by substantial evidence under the NLRA and the TRW Carr standard.
  5. Whether the President's January 4, 2012 appointments to the NLRB were valid under the Recess Appointments Clause and supplied the Board with a quorum.

Holdings

  1. The Board properly refused to set aside the election because the union's use of an employee's photograph without prior authorization was, at most, a campaign misrepresentation and did not involve a forgery or otherwise compromise employees' ability to recognize the material as campaign propaganda.
  2. The Board properly refused to set aside the election because Enterprise failed to show that the weather reasonably denied eligible employees an adequate opportunity to vote and that a determinative number of employees therefore did not vote.
  3. The statement that an employee should not burn bridges did not constitute objectionable coercive conduct requiring the election to be set aside.
  4. The NLRB acted within its discretion in finding that the technical employees in Huntington's E85 RADCON department possessed a sufficiently distinct community of interest to constitute a separate appropriate bargaining unit.
  5. The President's January 4, 2012 appointments of Sharon Block, Richard Griffin, Jr., and Terence Flynn to the NLRB were constitutionally invalid because they were not made during 'the Recess of the Senate.' Consequently, the NLRB lacked the quorum required to issue the 2012 decisions and orders in these cases.

Key quotations

For the reasons stated below, we conclude that the President’s three January 4, 2012 appointments to the Board are constitutionally infirm, because the appointments were not made during “the Recess of the Senate.”
In sum, we hold that the Board’s determination that the results of the election should not be set aside because Local 391 used a photograph of Enterprise employee Roberto Henriquez on a campaign flyer without Henriquez’s prior authorization is supported by substantial evidence.
In sum, the technical employees in the E85 RADCON department perform a radiological safety function that is sufficiently distinct from all other employees at the shipyard to warrant their having a separate bargaining unit.

Factual background

Enterprise employees voted in an NLRB-supervised election in which Local 391 prevailed by 44 votes to 41, with two challenged ballots. Enterprise objected to the election based on an unauthorized employee photograph, inclement weather, and a union organizer's statement that employees should not burn bridges; the Board rejected those objections. Huntington's E85 RADCON department included radiological control technicians, laboratory technicians, calibration technicians, and trainees who performed specialized radiological-safety functions, and the Machinists Union prevailed in an election limited to that departmental unit. Both employers then refused to bargain and challenged the NLRB's authority based on the President's January 4, 2012 appointments.

Procedural history

In the Enterprise matter, the Board certified Local 391 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters after an election, rejected Enterprise's objections, and later granted summary judgment against Enterprise for refusing to bargain. In the Huntington matter, the Board approved a departmental bargaining unit of technical employees in the E85 RADCON department, certified the Machinists Union after an election, and granted summary judgment after Huntington refused to bargain. The Fourth Circuit rejected the statutory challenges to the election and bargaining-unit determinations but held that the NLRB lacked a valid quorum because the January 4, 2012 appointments were unconstitutional.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Fourth Circuit